<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">Hmmm... I question Erin with some trepidation, but: if it make sense to flag both the illustration technique and the printing technology, would it not make sense, in cases of doubt as to the latter but not the former, to flag the technique? The qualities of line and such that are characteristic of the technique are smudged, shall we say, by mixing the technique and the technology into a generalization.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">This is complicated by the fact that the <i>illustrator's</i> technique may itself be a prior layer in the making of a wood-engraved illustration, though the resulting illustration is not a specimen of that technique. Still "Relief print" somehow fails to capture what one knows about basic qualities of the illustration. What one <i>does</i> know about a stereo/electro of a wood-engraved illustration is that the appearance of the specimen has to do with its origination as a block of wood.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">A fine point: I gather that a stereotype may be distinguishable side-by-side from an electrotype of the same wood engraving: the softer stereo wears relatively quickly, if I recall--I noted this in something I cataloged some while ago, but as is usual in such cases I can't manage to find it, now that it's relevant to a discussion. (It has to do with the printing of early editions of Jacob Abbott's "Rollo philosophy ..." books, with stereotyped text and directly printed blocks--because, as I think it was Abbott himself who remarked in his account of the Harper Printing Establishment, stereotyping couldn't satisfactorily reproduce fine lines, which became possible with electrotyping.)</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><font face="'courier new', monospace">RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY</font><div><font face="'courier new', monospace">BROWN UNIVERSITY :: PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912 :: 401-863-1187</font></div><div><span style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><</span><a href="mailto:RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace" target="_blank">Richard_Noble@Br</a><span style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><a href="http://own.edu" target="_blank">own.edu</a></span><span style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">></span></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 9:57 PM, Erin Blake <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:EBlake@folger.edu" target="_blank">EBlake@folger.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="m_-2064314471425206206WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Great question. One of the points I like to make when teaching "The History of Printed Book Illustration in the West" at Rare Book school is that, from the
19th century onward, "illustration technique" and "printing technique" don't always match.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">My go-to example for class discussion is an 1860s edition of
<i>Mr. Sponge's Sporting Tour</i>. The list of illustrations is headed "Engravings on steel" even though they're actually transfer lithographs of steel engravings (which were printed from steel plates in the first edition, 1853). So… what are they, engravings
or lithographs? The point of the discussion is to explore the divide between "illustration technique" as an aesthetic choice and "printing technique" as a practical matter of book production. People in class generally come around to agreeing that the
<i>illustration</i> technique is steel engraving, and the <i>printing</i> technique is transfer lithography, so both terms are appropriate.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">If it's institutional policy to provide access to specific types of print, and you know for-sure what both are, then I'd provide both terms in the 655, and
an explanatory note, e.g. "Illustrated with lithographically reproduced etchings."<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">However…. as you say, it can be impossible to tell the difference between a wood engraving and a stereotype of a wood engraving. The safe bet would be to use
the broader term "Relief prints" and move on. Maybe someone down the line will find the answer in the publisher's archives. That also lets
<i>you</i> know that you didn't just forget to add the 655. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Cheers,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Erin.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">________<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><br>
Erin C. Blake, Ph.D. | Head of Collection Information Services | Folger Shakespeare Library | 201 E. Capitol St. SE, Washington, DC, 20003 | <a href="mailto:eblake@folger.edu" target="_blank">eblake@folger.edu</a> | office tel. <a href="tel:%2B1%20202-675-0323" target="_blank">+1
202-675-0323</a> | fax <a href="tel:%2B1%20202-675-0328" target="_blank">+1 202-675-0328</a> | <a href="http://www.folger.edu/" target="_blank">www.folger.edu</a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> <a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.<wbr>byu.edu</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Matthew Ducmanas<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 04, 2017 8:47 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:dcrm-l@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank">dcrm-l@lib.byu.edu</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [DCRM-L] illustration technique / reproduction technique<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt">Hi all,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt">I recently posed a question regarding illustrations to some former Rare Book School colleagues as well as the always helpful Deborah J. Leslie. She suggested I might ask it here as well.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt">The question pertains largely to those of you who regularly trace illustration types in your records. Is there a common practice when tracing reproductions of illustrations that differ in technique?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt">For example, if you have an item containing wood engravings that have been either stereotyped or reproduced in some photoengraved fashion, do you still use a 655 for wood engravings? Or do you leave the tracing
off, or use something like 655 Line blocks? <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt">I can see utility in tracing an illustration made from a stereotyped wood engraving block as "Wood engravings" since the stereotype would make such a close reproduction (not to even mention the difficulty of
telling it apart from one printed from the original block). <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt">Though I imagine there has to be limits to this approach otherwise we'd end up in the strange situation of, for example, tracing a relief halftone or offset lithograph reproduction as the original illustrative
technique. I've seen books with relief halftone reproductions of etchings. Seems wrong to trace that as an etching.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt">Just curious if any of you have mulled over this at all or know of a common practice.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt">Thanks,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt">Matt<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>Matthew Ducmanas</i><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>Special Collections Cataloging Librarian</i><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>Temple University Libraries</i><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>Philadelphia, Pa.</i><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><a href="mailto:matthew.ducmanas@temple.edu" target="_blank">matthew.ducmanas@temple.edu</a></i><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>215-204-20157</i><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>