10 May 2017
Part 4, Stage 4 – Sorting
Project 1 – Mono printing
Project 1 consisted of four exercises:
- Mark-making (reductive, removing ink selectively from the plate)
- Drawing onto the plate (additive, painting or applying ink directly onto the plate)
- Back drawing (using pressure to transfer a mark from an inked plate onto a piece of paper laid on top of it)
- Working with stencils (using simple masks to create printed shapes)
In the initial two exercises, I found that I was concentrating on learning about the behaviour of the ink and paper/fabric, rather than focusing on the images which I was producing. As I progressed to exercises 3 and 4, I felt more confident and was also able to combine techniques effectively.
From exercise 1, the only image which I felt was successful as a stand alone print was sample 7a (below). This was a sample which I made after completing exercise 3.
Exercise 3 produced another successful image using reductive technique (exercise 3, sample 4d below). This was made by reworking an inked plate that I’d used for back drawing on exercise 3, sample 4c. I am very fond of this image because it is dramatic and suggests lighting and shadow around the character. I’m sure that with more practise, I would be able to refine my marks and make them more controlled and subtle.
Exercise 2 produced lovely simple drawn outline prints, of which my favourite is sample 7b (below). Despite it’s simplicity, the lines in the print are characterful and have a spontaneous, playful feel.
Also, there was the very detailed still life (exercise 2, sample 5a, below) which I consider to be a technical success due to it’s boldness, vibrancy and the way which a variety of marks have been controlled. As an image I don’t have immediate plans for how it could be developed, although I can imagine using the techniques on other projects in conjunction with perhaps with backdrawing or stitching.
I had to spend a lot of time experimenting before producing bold, readable prints for exercise 3 (back drawing), many of the prints were being too feint to give meaningful images. Although I consider sample 3a (below) a technical success, for me it felt as if the print still lacked interest and character. Perhaps it was because I’d traced the image, and my mark-making needs to be more fluid and spontaneous? This characteristic is one of the reasons why Tracey Emin’s mono prints are so successful (see for example her Royal Academy bird print
) (Eastaugh, 2017a)
I successfully re-worked a couple of my back drawing “failures” (exercise 3, samples 1 and 2b), which contributed background depth and texture to my stencil prints (see exercise 4, samples 1 below by way of example):
Exercise 4 (working with stencils), was the most exciting exercise for me. This was because of the success which I had experimenting with textile samples and the exciting images I produced by combining them with back drawing techniques (see exercise 4, samples 4a and 4c below):
I can imagine that I could develop these samples further to produce a series, perhaps combining them with a joining method, using cutting to enhance negative space (for example around the crooked arm), or by using areas of translucent material in conjunction with the prints. I could also look at introducing a second colour into image 4a (for example gold or red, as developed in my sketchbook pages 47 and 49-50).
Although I also made some lovely prints with plant stencils, I feel that I would need work on my composition and colour to improve on the images which I produced – by comparison see the plant stencil collage by Mary Margaret Briggs
, which is much more striking, modern and appealing, and which would make an excellent cushion cover or wallpaper design (Eastaugh, 2017b). Artists like Brenda Hartill
use plant stencils within her collagraphs (Eastaugh, 2017c), so this is an alternative way in which I might consider using plant material/stencils in future.
Project 2 – Collatype printing
Although there were three exercises in project 2, the first 2 were concerned with producing sample boards from collage and textured polyfiller, to gain knowledge and experience. From the first two exercises, I particularly liked the beautiful prints which I achieved in sample 3 (extracts from which are shown below). I’m sure I could develop these into transitioned textured surfaces, perhaps incorporating stitch and/or textile manipulation.
Technically, I found project 2 much more challenging than project 1 and consequently, I do not feel that many of my outcomes from exercise 3 were generally as successful as stand alone pieces. The exception being sample 2a (see below):
Although I felt that the outcome could have been better balanced, I would also consider developing exercise sample 3c (below), because I feel that the combination of collagraph texture and back drawn line were starting to work. I can see that with a bit more experimentation, this sample has the potential to become very engaging.
Thinking about which techniques I would develop further from project 1, it would have to be mark-making (reductive process) and stencilling in conjunction with back drawing and extending and exploring the use of fabric stencils. In particular, I can see a lot of scope within both these processes to develop my figure prints. I would use the samples below as a starting point for refinement and development.
From Project 2, I would like to specifically extend my knowledge of printing with collage materials (including plants) and polyfiller textures. The beautiful outcome from exercise 2, sample 3 suggests that there is much more unexplored potential. This knowledge would help me to develop sample 3c from exercise 3 (below left) and to improve landscape prints such as sample 2a (below right).
Eastaugh, N. (2017a) Tracey Emin RA Bird print. [Pinterest pin] At:http://pin.it/GefagN3 (Accessed 10 May 2017)
Eastaugh, N. (2017b) Monotype collage, Mary Margaret Briggs. [Pinterest pin] At:http://pin.it/UVvtj95 (Accessed 10 May 2017)
Eastaugh, N. (2017c) Brenda Hartill. [Pinterest pin] At:http://pin.it/KK89Dh_ (Accessed 10 May 2017)