[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Rubber Stamps-reply
- To: BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Rubber Stamps-reply
- From: "Melissa L. Hatalsky" <missyh@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 13:44:30 -0400
- Message-id: <199808021802.LAA22750@SUL-Server-2.Stanford.edu>
- Sender: "Book_Arts-L: On the web at http://www.dreamscape.com/pdverhey" <BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Okay...I confess...I have a lot of art stamps...but I will be the first to
admit that I don't have one in the size you are referring to. (Not super
familiar with mm...but according to my ruler...you are talking one really
big stamp!) The largest image I have in my collection measures off at 9
1/2" x 6 1/2". This is mounted to thick hard maple...and it is hard to
handle...but can be done.
In my opinion (humbly submitted) you would have a devil of a time handling
something of that size...at least in the traditional Stamp to paper
techniques that most people employ. I think that you would be much better
off with a lino cut image...inking the linocut on its back with a brayer
and putting the paper to the image. Press with a barren for transfer.
This would do away with handling a huge block with an image attached to
it...the folder would be much easier to handle....and would probably ensure
more exact placement as well as ink transfer.
On the embossing......don't play with it for an image this size....it has
too many variables and possibilities for things to go wrong....stray bits
of powder where they are not supposed to be....this could be solved by
using Pounce to remove static..but still carries the risk of many unwanted
mistakes. To second anothers opinion, I too think it would detract from
the "handmade" look you are shooting for....embossing is wonderful...but it
does look very "machine made".....
Just my two cents....not that they are worth much :)
Best of luck in your decision!