DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.28460#0178
Division B.—Dottecl Prints.
153
of the latter style,1 and the result is, of course, very different frorn
that attained when the process of engraving and the process of print-
ing are strictly appropriate one to the other, and yield togetlier the
hest result whicli the traditions of the art can prodnce. Both the
eopper-plate engraved with the burin and the wood-block cut with
the knife, though prepared and printed on directly opposite prin-
eiples, produce in the end the same result: a design in black lines
with white spaces between them, which corresponds to a drawing in
black ink on white paper. (There are exceptions to this rule, partial
or complete, in the case of woodcuts, but they are so rare and un-
important that they may, for the present, be disregarded.) Now a
“ dotted print ” presents, on the contrary, a design in white with
black spaces, broken up into tints intermediate between black and
white, which is not analogous to any customary style of drawing.
How is this effect produced ? It is not due to a mistake in printing,
causing a negative impression to be taken, for then the decorative
offect would be obviously wrong, and not, as it is now, the result of
deliberate though, as we may think, eccentric calculation. The true
explanation of it is as follows. The engraver took a metal plate (not
copper, but some softer metal, probably an alloy resembling pewter,
which could easily receive an impression from a punch or stamp),
and proceeded to work upon it with a variety of tools—burin, knife,
punches of several sizes, and stamps designed to impress a variety of
small ornamental patterns—always bearing in mind the method of
printing which was to be adopted, viz., relief-printing, in which the
surface prints black and the ground, or portion sunk below the sur-
face, does not print at all, but leaves the paper white. The plate, if
printed from before the work began, would produce a black rectangle,
just as a wood-block would do, before it was cut. In working upon
it, the engraver would proceed on a different principle, and use more
complicated methods than the woodcutter. All that tlie latter had
to do was to leave the design standing on thin ridges of the original
surface, and cut away all the unnecessary wood between them, in
order to leave white spaces. The other craftsman had to pay much
more attention to his white spaces, for it is these that tell in the end
and produce the actual design by standing out upon a black ground.
Usually, as it seems, he would begin by outlining delicately witli the
1 M. Hymans (“ Documents Iconographiques et Typographiques de la Bibliotlibque
Royale de Belgique,” 1877, pp. 14, 17 and 18) saysthat they were produced by a combi-
nation of both methods of engraving, while Dr. Willshire (“ Introduction to tbe Study of
Ancient Prints,” 1877, vol. ii, pp. 58, 65 and 66) went a step furtlier and supposed a
-combination of both methods of printing, which is a refinement inconceivable at that
period, if not impossible altogether.
What the
process was.
153
of the latter style,1 and the result is, of course, very different frorn
that attained when the process of engraving and the process of print-
ing are strictly appropriate one to the other, and yield togetlier the
hest result whicli the traditions of the art can prodnce. Both the
eopper-plate engraved with the burin and the wood-block cut with
the knife, though prepared and printed on directly opposite prin-
eiples, produce in the end the same result: a design in black lines
with white spaces between them, which corresponds to a drawing in
black ink on white paper. (There are exceptions to this rule, partial
or complete, in the case of woodcuts, but they are so rare and un-
important that they may, for the present, be disregarded.) Now a
“ dotted print ” presents, on the contrary, a design in white with
black spaces, broken up into tints intermediate between black and
white, which is not analogous to any customary style of drawing.
How is this effect produced ? It is not due to a mistake in printing,
causing a negative impression to be taken, for then the decorative
offect would be obviously wrong, and not, as it is now, the result of
deliberate though, as we may think, eccentric calculation. The true
explanation of it is as follows. The engraver took a metal plate (not
copper, but some softer metal, probably an alloy resembling pewter,
which could easily receive an impression from a punch or stamp),
and proceeded to work upon it with a variety of tools—burin, knife,
punches of several sizes, and stamps designed to impress a variety of
small ornamental patterns—always bearing in mind the method of
printing which was to be adopted, viz., relief-printing, in which the
surface prints black and the ground, or portion sunk below the sur-
face, does not print at all, but leaves the paper white. The plate, if
printed from before the work began, would produce a black rectangle,
just as a wood-block would do, before it was cut. In working upon
it, the engraver would proceed on a different principle, and use more
complicated methods than the woodcutter. All that tlie latter had
to do was to leave the design standing on thin ridges of the original
surface, and cut away all the unnecessary wood between them, in
order to leave white spaces. The other craftsman had to pay much
more attention to his white spaces, for it is these that tell in the end
and produce the actual design by standing out upon a black ground.
Usually, as it seems, he would begin by outlining delicately witli the
1 M. Hymans (“ Documents Iconographiques et Typographiques de la Bibliotlibque
Royale de Belgique,” 1877, pp. 14, 17 and 18) saysthat they were produced by a combi-
nation of both methods of engraving, while Dr. Willshire (“ Introduction to tbe Study of
Ancient Prints,” 1877, vol. ii, pp. 58, 65 and 66) went a step furtlier and supposed a
-combination of both methods of printing, which is a refinement inconceivable at that
period, if not impossible altogether.
What the
process was.