Art Prints

[lover]

I would like to know  if an Original painting is worth more ,less or the same if  you make signed,numbered ,limited edtion fine art prints from it?

[mrs.pudding]

It rather depends on the artist I think.  If you had an original David Shepherd (wildlife artist) it's value would be increasing and the popularity of the prints would make the original even more valuable.

But there are signed prints out there of unknown artists and I suspect their work would become neither more nor less valuable.  It's more a matter of what the buyer is prepared to pay.  Good art finds its own level in the end.

[LordyGeordie]

its impossible to have limited edition prints if the original is still around as there's always the possiblity of more prints being made.

i was always told a lot of artists burnt the originals to give the prints more value. i presume this is the leass well known artists and not famous ones

[Kingaroo]

With a painting theprocess of making a print involves taking it to a printer for careful color analysis and then a batch of prints can be run. The painter can sign them to show they are approved. Each print is numbered: the print you buy may say 33/1000 (that means print #33 of 1000 printed). The materials used to print the reproductions would be destroyed. Certainly the painter could authorize another round of prints, but would start all over from scratch, with another color separation, set of printing screens, etc.


If the original art is itself a print -- lithograph, etching, etc -- the artist makes the prints him(her)self and signs and numbers them.

Years later, anyone who has the plates (etchings are done on metal, lithographs on stone, etc.) can run off a batch of prints, but since they are not signed and part of the original series, they will not be worth as much.

As Mrs. Pudding says, the existence of the prints is unlikely to change the value of hte painting. Surely the Mona Lisa is no less valuable because you can find postcards and prints everywhere!