King Crimson Print Collection by Tony Levin Available For Pre-Orders

For Immediate Release (11/17/21)

King Crimson Print Collection by Tony Levin Available For Pre-Orders, Shipping Early 2022

Bass Legend and Photographer Tony Levin’s King Crimson Print Collection Available for Pre-Orders, Shipping Early 2022

• Eight stunning, limited-edition prints spanning Tony Levin’s work with King Crimson since the early 1980s
• Every print is signed, numbered, and certified by Intaglio Editions LLC
• Prints are made by contemporary photogravure printmaker, Jon Lybrook
• Available as individual prints or in a limited-edition, custom-crafted clamshell print collection box
• The first public orders are assigned print numbers 11-50 out of 500 prints total in each edition
Pre-orders are now being accepted at TonyLevinPrints.com

Tony Levin is not a bassist. He just happens to play the bass.” – Robert Fripp

Tony Levin (King Crimson, Peter Gabriel) has been photographing his touring experiences since the early 1980s. Tens of thousands of photos later, he’s compiled eight of his favorite photographic moments from forty years of touring with King Crimson. These prints include:

1. Adrian Belew, Backstage 1981
2. Bill Bruford, Bristol 1981
3. King Crimson, Faro, Portugal 1982
4. King Crimson, Royal Albert Hall 2019
5. King Crimson, Asbury Park 1982
6. On the Shinkansen 1981
7. Perkins Palace Marquee 1981
8. Robert Fripp, Krakow 2018

This collection is a must-have for any serious King Crimson collector and can be purchased as a set or individually. Tony’s photography offers a unique perspective from the stage that cannot be replicated.

All photos are hand-titled and signed by Tony Levin. They are a limited print run of 500 photogravure prints. The first public orders of the Special Edition Box are assigned print numbers 11-50.

Each print is handmade on a traditional intaglio press using materials that will last for generations. They are printed with low or acid-free ink on 22.25 x 15.5” Hahnemuhle Copperplate Brite White, 300 g/sm alpha cellulose paper with torn, deckled edges. These same ink and paper formulas used in Tony Levin’s print collection have been used by printmakers in Europe for hundreds of years.

Signed and stamped certificates of authenticity are issued with every print.

The traditional, fabric-lined, limited-edition, clamshell-style, 24” x 17” print collection box for Tony Levin’s King Crimson Print Collection is custom-crafted using archive-grade materials for storing and preserving prints cleanly and elegantly. Cotton gloves are included for clean handling of the prints.

Jon Lybrook is a true master. His prints exude an expertise, that only very few fine art printers in the world control on the same level.” – Professor Henrik Bøegh – Grafisk Eksperimentarium – Copenhagen, Denmark

Jon Lybrook is a Fine Art Printmaker based in Colorado. Jon has worked with photographers and artists for nearly two decades through his company, Intaglio Editions LLC (https://intaglioeditions.com/). He has studied the craft with traditional printmakers from around the world including Henrik Boegh, Dan Welden, Mark Lunning, Ron Pokrasso, David Hoptman, and has worked as both a printmaker and consultant.

Watch the Make Weird Music interview with Tony about his history with photography and art:

To pre-order: https://TonyLevinPrints.com

Photogravure Proofing with Colored Etching Inks

Colored ink renders a photographic image much differently than black ink-only, as any printmaker knows. At Intaglio Editions we offer two generic ink profiles for our plate customers: Graphical and Continuous Tone. Continuous Tone plates are designed to work best with the blackest inks to create richness and tones similar to platinium/plalladium prints, but with greater relief details in the shadows, not found with other approaches.

When colored inks are desired, the process is to measure and mix the ink to get to an initial color or set of colors. The ink combination is then wiped into a baseline step test plate which is then printed, dried for a week or so, and scanned. The data is then measured and transferred into a spreadsheet or computer program.

Measuring Colored Inks
Measuring Colored Inks

Areas of the step test that appear blocked up together, or too light or too dark can then be manipulated in a process compensation curve or using 3rd-party RIP software like Quad Tone RIP. This data is then used to craft a customized plate of the artwork in the desired ink color.

Because ink color is hard to reproduce from batch to batch, traditional printmakers will keep careful track of their formulae as well as the B.A.T., or master print, in order to match the color again, should it be necessary to replace a print or if the artist has another image they want to edition and have it match. Every color ink may have its own unique physical properties which must be taken into account when formulating the proper consistency.

Custom sepia ink combinations ranging from cold to warm.

Body, Length and Tack are a few of the main qualities that affect the ink and how it is received by the plate’s matrix. In some cases, the amount of plate tone and contrast can vary a bit, until the plate has been properly seasoned and the ink’s step test is properly dried and analyzed. The ink is then modified to suit the needs of the piece.

The video below demonstrates a step test ink comparison we did while providing photogravure consulting for the great-grandson of the legendary American photographer Edward Curtis. The image we made the plate from in this video was taken from a scan of a vintage, glass plate copy negative. Alas, most of the original films that remained in tact were donated to The Smithsonian and unavailable for their project at the time.

From this video you can see how even relatively graphical images contain nuances of continuous tone and relief in the shadow details that make the difference between a more traditional-quality photogravure print, and one that looks like a flat, slightly depressed and grainy inkjet print. We of course aim to produce the former using traditional approaches and 15 years of experience exclusively specializing in polymer photogravure.

For more information about Intaglio Editions projects, and contracting with us on your own printmaking project, please visit our website at https://shop.intaglioeditions.com.

Wiping and Printing a Polymer Photogravure Plate in 60 Seconds

Recent work with photographer Larry D. Hayden kept us hopping for a few days in August head.  Here’s a little video excerpt showing off Larry’s evocative work and how we printed it.

 

 

Plate Scratches

Hi Jon,

I am an artist in Edinburgh, UK and a member of Edinburgh Printmakers. My practice includes filmmaking, photography and printmaking.

For the past 18 months I have been exploring the potential of photopolymer in relation to my film work and photography. I have followed your videos and blogs assiduously and found them very helpful. Generally I have been reasonably successful in producing a series of A3 photopolymer prints but just lately I have been plagued by scratches which as you might expect are often in critical areas and are very dispiriting.

These are dark scratches in the prints but correspond to visible scratches on the plate when examined carefully. I have gone carefully through all the stages in making the plate to try and eliminate the potential for scratches. I do use a communal workshop so it can be difficult to eliminate all variables or keep a dust free environment.

I use a Boxcar brush for washout which I have had for about 14 months and use for one plate making session weekly since I bought it. I also use an antistatic brush (Kinetronics StaticWisk hand held anti-static brushes are used for cleaning lenses, films, scanners, cameras, plastics, acrylics, jewellery, glass, monitors, instruments and technical equipment on the plate before exposure to the aquatint screen and again before exposure to the image acetate to ensure that the surface of the polymer does not have dust particles that might cause dust flares.

Checking the plate after each stage of the procedure, I have noticed scratches immediately after washout and drying. I use newsprint, paper towels and a hairdryer to dry the plate. I have thought that maybe I have been using too much pressure on the Boxcar brush and today I really tried to exert just the pressure of the weight of the brush with very little extra from my hand. I use elliptical movements across the long and short lengths of the plate and then if I have time diagonally as well. I soak the plate initially for 1 minute, washout with the brush for one and half minutes and then rinse for one minute. Even today being so careful with the brush, there were again scratches visible just after washout and drying. It’s getting to be a bit disheartening.

My photopolymer plates are Toyobo KM95GR which I get from Allflexo in the Netherlands.

Do you have any suggestions as to what I might be doing wrong?

All the best,

Olga Kaliszer

 

Hi Olga,

Thanks for your email. Scratches should not be too difficult to track down.  Not exerting any pressure on the brush is the way to go. I  also use gentle, small, circular strokes when washing out the plate.  

The plates are most susceptible to scratching during washout, of course. Unlike your approach, I do the washout for two minutes and do not soak the plate in a tray, rather I keep it on an angle, pour water over the plate a little at a time as I ‘scrub’ the plate lightly and methodically.  I then give it a final rinse, blot with newsprint, then dry for 5 minutes with a hairdryer, put in my plate drier for 10 minutes, post expose for 5 minutes, then do a final round of hardening in the plate drier for 25 minutes. I’d suggest not soaking the plate and increase the washout time.  Bear in mind, this may change how much exposure you need to give the plates and may cause you to have to recalibrate the times.

Feel free to send images demonstrating the scratches. The pattern in the scratches should give you an indication of when they are happening. Good luck tracking down the cause and finding a solution. Also, is it okay with you if I post your question and response on my blog?  It may help another person with a similar problem one day.

Best wishes,

Jon

Fine Traditional Printmaking in Copenhagen, Denmark

There is nothing like a vacation abroad to open your eyes. Our trip to Copenhagen was no exception. The number of fine printmakers within that city rivals any other city in the world.  Henrik Boergh recommended we visit here after giving us a grand tour of his studio a few miles away.  Our conversation had not prepared me for the magnitude of this operation or the friendliness of the artisans running the place.  It was all at once educational, joyful, and a great connection to the tradition we follow in fine, archival printmaking.

Here are some of the highlights.

We had the pleasure of visiting the Niels Borch Jensen studios in Copenhagen over Thanksgiving (2017)

Having to find the studio by bus in Copenhagen was a grand adventure that required some planning and assistance from the many kind people there.

One of the most jaw-dropping photogravure from polymer plate was just tacked to their entryway bulletin board at Niels Borch Jensen’s studio.  Alas, the photogravure master had left for the day. Next time I will plan my visit better. I would love to learn from him directly more about how he did this!

Mitte gave me a fabulous tour and was most generous with her time and experience. She  has been working at the studio as a professional fine printmaker since 1989!

We looked over a cross section of about 50 years of fine printmaking in the hour plus I visited the studio.

In Master Printer Niels Borch Jensen’s office! This Keith Haring piece was printed at the Copenhagen studio where I was visiting in the 1990s.

Mr. Jensen regularly sends his printmakers to art openings in America, Berlin, and all over the world. Mitte had just returned from an art opening in Atlanta. Thanks for a grand tour!

Old Ideas Breathing New Life into Creativity

Cleaning up the intaglio editions website I came across an old file – not sure why it was on the website, but it reminded me of some techniques in intaglio I have yet to experiment with on the press. Granted these kinds of techniques could and probably should be simulated on the computer before going into the studio to save time, however there are occasions where what happens in the studio is a complete surprise and a gift that would never have occurred had one not ventured forward IRL (in real life) with curiosity and confidence.

So re-visit those old notebooks from time to time, as you might old friends.

Here’s what the old page of notes said:

My next plan is to try and do multiple plates – one for each of the tonal ranges
(shadow, midtones, highlights) and use complimentary colors for each of them.

– 02/22/04 – Create 3 plates:

  1. Get good black and white print first. Overall image must have rich blacks and nice, balanced tone.
  2. Last plate: Blacks only. Extract blacks from image and put it into it’s own plate. This will prevent ‘fuzzy’ look and will keep lines sharp.
  3. Middle and First plates – Midtone and Lighttone plates for use via a la poupee! Create two plates, on that contains the mid to preblack tones and another that ranges from highlights to midtones. — Try overlapping the mid areas on these two plates to prevent posterization, rather, color blending will occur in these areas…
  4. Inks of different viscosities will repel one another.
    1. Use a combination of translucent and concentrated inks, dob onto plate, then wipe by putting plate face down on stack of newsprint and firmly drag the plate in a particular direction. Do consistently for multiple wipings. Wipe in opposite direction in the same manner. Try rotating side to side too.
    2. Use magnesium carbonate to inks to make it stiffer and more viscous
    3. Use plate oil to make a ‘lean’, low-viscosity ink
  5. First plate – Lightest color

Only problem will be devising a process for coming up with somewhat accurate registration.

Instead of Q-tips or brushes or felt for a la poupee, use stiff brushes to deliver ink to plate.

Deriving Curve and Exposure Times from Scratch (Part II)

I’ve been talking with copper gravurist Barbara Sanders over Email some more about the challenges with first establishing exposure and washout times when processing a polymer plate.  Also when is the right time to begin tweaking the curve applied to the transparencies.  I’m hoping that documenting her journey helps provide insight to others.

~~^*~^*~^*^~*^~*~^*~^*~^*~^*^~*~^*^~*^~*^*^~*~^*~^*^~*~^~^

Barbara said:

Spent most of the day making test plates and trying to get the work flow correct. Not a bad day and feel I am close to proper exposure times. I am starting to collude that my transparency needs adjustment (the dreaded curves question!).

small-step-wedgeI included the following step wedge with my test image to evaluate where things weren’t getting enough information.

0, 10, and 20% are pure white; there is no difference in black 90, 100; my 70 reads like the 80.

I am thinking if I lose density in the blacks and lower the output of the whites that they might darken (grey). Correct?…Hard to figure which variables to tweak first.

~~^*~^*~^*^~*^~*~^*~^*~^*~^*^~*~^*^~*^~*^*^~*~^*~^*^~*~^~^

Hi Barbara,

Thanks for the info.  You’ve basically got 20 steps which is an ambitious undertaking flying solo, but more information is better than less.  You should be able to get 20 unique tones with this process using Mark Nelson’s screen and the KM73 plates.  The last 10% of perfection is always the hardest won.

My sense is if you’re losing the top 20% of your highlights 10% of the shadows (with 70 and 80 looking the same), you need to pull down your exposure times a little and get paper white at 0% and some tone in the 5% area to start with, before tackling the curve (which is how you can address at least some of the midtone/shadow detail issues later).  Whether you pull back time on the aquatint screen or the film positive, or both is the question.  If you lack enough exposure, the black areas of the plate will go mushy, so that will be your cue if you’ve gone too far and don’t have enough exposure time.  Varying even 5 seconds of washout will also make a difference from my experience, so if you’re getting too mushy, you might back off washout time as it is the third physical variable you want to get a grip on (in addition to your two exposure times) before tweaking curves.  If the plate gets too sticky and sticks to the newsprint when blotting, you may need to increase washout time (or exposures).  How the plate feels is the first step to getting this first part right.

You really want to get as close as you can to even distribution of tones using exposure and washout times before fine tuning with the process compensation curve.  It’s a dance between increasing and decreasing these three times until you’re safe to mess with the curve.  Changing too much at once out of frustration is tempting, but don’t do it.  That way lies madness.  😉

You may also find once you start tweaking the curve, you have to tweak exposure and washout times yet again.  Don’t be discouraged, as this is the way you need to juggle the variables until things start coming together.  It’s time consuming, but the only way I know how to go about it with any accuracy given the multitude of variables.

For my current workflow using my custom screen I use the following exposure times:

Screen Exposure Time:  10.5 units
Image Exposure Time:  14.5 units

I’m giving this as an example: This ratio of screen to image time is not critical as there doesn’t seem to be any rhyme nor reason to it with any printmakers I’ve spoken with to date.  It just depends on your other variables (film density, exposure unit, screen quality).  I’ve seen people have screen and image times equal or vary as much as 100%.

Another tip:  Make sure you always warm up your exposure unit by blasting it for 60 seconds before exposing plates for the day.  It will normalize the exposure to some degree I’ve been told.

Best of luck.  Send me a scan of your printed exposure test if you’re able.

Jon

Deriving Curve and Exposure Times from Scratch

Met with seasoned copper gravure printmaker Barbara Sanders this week and had a lively exchange of information with her and her ceramicist husband Bill regarding the craft and business side of art.  Barbara is migrating from copper to polymer with great success as she works toward “close enough to perfect” to feel good about the process.  This is the quandary with most printmakers as our thirst for perfection is hard to quench.

The main geek topic of our conversation was how to best start to derive a compensation curve and exposure times.  Barbara had taken a sample of my company’s custom aquatint screen back home with her after our meeting and came back with some absolute numbers.  Here is the email exchange and some of my thoughts about starting to derive a curve, screen exposure time and image exposure time:

—–Original Message—–
From: Bill and Barbara Sanders
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 9:48 AM
To: Jon Lybrook
Subject: thanks

Such a fun afternoon!
Thank you for taking the time to see me and my work. I sure love your prints!
I measured the density of your screen  :  about 53/54 whatever units the densitometer is in
my new screen   : about 168/170
my old screen     : about 80/83
hence the different exposure times aside from our different exposure units wattage. Complicated but still fun!
Off to Mac class!
Many thanks again.
Barb

———————————-

Thanks Barbara,

Thanks for the screen measurement.  Like I said I don’t know a lot about measuring density. I guess because I pretty much worked out my process backwards from the resulting print back to the curve and exposure times.  The absolute density of a screen and film positive meant nothing to me in the beginning since I had no point of reference, unlike photogravurist John Goodman and those who have had a historical knowledge of their materials and the process.  I could only hope my screens were consistent, and so far they have seemed to be.  But I am curious about it and appreciate your encouragement in that direction.  It would help to verify consistency among my limited stock of custom screens.

Since these screens are made up of dots, as black as we can get the imagesetter to produce them, I’m assuming it’s taking an average of the dots-to-clear-film ratio and coming up with a number.  In other words, it’s not measuring a continuous-tone density as traditional film provides, but rather a combination of these factors.

I’m presuming your screens read darker because the dots are bigger, allowing less light to come through.  Not because the dots on your screens are more opaque than mine, though if your exposure time of the screen/image is too high, the density of the dots on the screen would certainly be a factor as well.

To get a good curve and exposure time relationship, I test first by getting the screen to produce the richest black in my exposure and still provide tone up the scale.  This is where

Gradient circle test Grid by Jon Lybrook

Gradient circle test Grid by Intaglio Editions

those gradient circle tests in my procedure occurred – to get a ball-park sense of where I am.  I would then tweak the curve in conjunction with exposure times until I was able to maintain a rich black and get some added continuous tone in the highlights.  Trying to keep the black where it was, I’d tweak the process compensation curve and exposure times as needed to bring out more and more of the greys in both shadows and highlights.  Kind of like chasing your own tail in a way at first, but these factors start to even out if the testing is paced and consistent.

Subtle, but possibly relevant point pertaining to the quality of the outcome and the reason why I went with an extremely fine screen:  Bigger the dots, the more contrast, the more contrast, the less possible grey tones.  I like lots of grey-tone potential because you can always add contrast in the film transparency and make it more graphic if you want to, but you can’t add broad continuous tone until you’ve been able to achieve it already through a balanced combination of the process compensation curve along with proper exposure times of the screen and film positive.

Best of luck with your curve training.  Let me know if  there are any questions I can answer in your journey!

Best regards,

Jon

.

Monoprints vs Monotypes

Monoprints are prints made using an etched plate, but inked in different ways.  Not to be confused with monotypes, which do not generally use a plate or matrix, monoprints can be made in variable editions – meaning made the same but with some differences among each print in the edition – or one-of-a-kind, like monotypes.  Monotypes differ from Monoprints in that there is no matrix, and is more freeform where ink is applied directly to a piece of unetched plexiglass or other material and printed.  Some monotype techniques include using mylar or other material to mask off and even pick up ink from certain areas of the plate for subsequent monotype printings.  Monotypes are truly one-of-a-kind pieces since there is no “permanent” plate matrix, and none of the forms and color blending can really be repeated the same way again.  They are, in effect, paintings done on a press.

Snapdragon 2 - monotype by Jon Lybrook

Snapdragon II – monotype by Jon Lybrook courtesy of the Will Witman collection.

Recently I met printmaker Julia Lucey from California who works exclusively with monoprints using traditionally etched copper plates.  Her etchings alone are wonderfully rich and detailed, but she doesn’t stop there.  She layers her prints with multiple plate impressions creating a cubist-like ensemble of pieces that make up the whole.

Julia Lucey Monoprint

Julia Lucey Monoprint

Julia gives a succinct explanation of traditional copperplate etching on her website.

Anti-Devil

Anti-Devil Monoprint by Jon Lybrook

Photogravure Polymer plates can likewise be used for monoprints in this same manner.  This piece was done all on one plate, which I first wiped clean with blank ink, then effectively painted over using colored inks.  Unlike traditional etching, photoshop can be used to superimpose or manipulate the artwork before the plate is made. This is also considered one of the disadvantages of polymer in that it is difficult to do much to rework the plate with much precision once it has been created because it is made of plastic. Still, there are things one can do with polymer for creative effects, such as scratching it with sandpaper, mottling it with water, or “drawing” into it with a soldering iron.

When it comes to monoprints vs monotypes, the bottom line is they are both beautiful printmaking techniques.  It’s just a matter of whether or not the printmaker wishes to use or reuse an etched, drypoint, or polymer photogravure plate.