Monday, June 22, 2009

Numbered prints

There is a lot of confusion over what it means to have a “numbered” print, so I will discuss the issue in today’s blog. What people usually mean when they say that a print is numbered, is that the artist or printer or publisher has indicated that the print in question was the Xth print out of a total of YY made. This is usually indicated with a pencil notation in the margin in the form X/YY.

So, for instance, if Thomas Willoughby Nason produced a total of only 200 impressions of his print of “Upland Pastures,” then he would mark the fifth print that he pulled from the woodblock as “5/200” and the eighty-ninth he pulled off the block as “89/200” and so on. This was intended as an indication to a potential buyer that there was only a limited number of these prints made (200) and that this one was one of the official group (number 89).

It is important to realize that this numbering is really only a marketing stratagem, not something that has anything to do with the intrinsic quality or value of the print. Artists numbered prints simply so that buyers would know that the run was limited and that their print was one of the official run. The presence of numbering does not in itself make the print any more or less valuable, it just allows us to have knowledge of a couple of important facts about the print.

It is, however, quite clear that for prints by artists who did number their prints (and there are many who didn’t), it is important to have the number on the print, for that does tell us those important facts. While it is true that if Nason did not number his prints they would still be just as valuable, for those prints he did number, you want to make sure you have an impression with the numbering. Where a particular print was numbered by the artist, any impression without a number is probably one that is a reproduction or a later restrike, not from the original series, and that of course means that impression has considerably less value.

There a number of reasons why prints are not numbered. First off, numbering of a print is a relatively modern notion. It was only in the late nineteenth century, with the etching revival, that prints began to be numbered. Before that time there was no need to number prints---all prints were run off in limited numbers. Printing processes were such that huge runs of prints could not be made and also there wasn’t a large enough market that anyone would run off more than a relatively limited number of impressions. Before the mid-nineteenth century, no one worried about there being a huge number of impressions of any print, so why would anyone bother to number theirs? It is much like how now-a-days television broadcasts from around the world often are noted as being either “Live” or “Recorded earlier.” Fifty years ago, no television broadcast of an event from overseas could be shown live, so no one would have thought to bother to label a broadcast as “Recorded earlier.” Likewise, before the later nineteenth century, no printmakers would have thought of numbering their prints.

A second reason many prints are not numbered is that the numbering of prints is really limited to “fine art” prints that were intended to be marketed to discerning collectors who cared about such things. Most prints, as discussed in an earlier blog, are commercial prints that were not aimed at a collectors market and for those prints there was no reason to bother to number them. Most of these prints were, of course, issued in far greater number than the fine art prints which were numbered, but some of these are very rare today and, as discussed earlier, scarcity is not that important a factor in the value of most of these prints.

Finally, many modern, fine art printmakers just didn’t bother to number their prints. This could be for a number of reasons, such as the possibility they didn’t want to limit how many impressions they could run off, or they didn’t feel that it would help sell their prints, or whatever. Many modern prints are official impressions from a limited series even though they lack numbering. What is important for those who are purchasing modern, fine art prints is that you know whether the series in question was numbered. If you are looking at a print from a series that was never numbered, then the absence of a number means nothing, but if the series was numbered and the one you are looking at does not have one, you should either avoid that print or make sure you are paying only an appropriate price for such an impression.

The discussion above refers only to numbered prints in the usual sense of an indication that a particular print is impression X out of YY made. Many antique prints have just a single number of them, and one of the most common queries we get on our web site or at Antiques Roadshow is what this type of number means. Are these “numbered prints?” No; these are not what is usually considered a numbered print. These single numbers which appear on prints are what is called “stock” or “catalog” numbers, for they are the number of the print in a stock list or a print catalog issued by the printmaker. The same stock number appears on every example of that print. This number was used so that if you are a framer or printseller and you want to order prints from the publisher, you just put in an order for print #26 or three copies of #12 and two of #48, and so on.

A stock or catalog number is typically a single number that appears on the print, usually somewhere along the bottom. These numbers appear on quite a number of the mid-nineteenth century prints by publishers such as Currier & Ives or the Kelloggs, and also on many of the later decorative prints from the late 19th or early 20th century, by such publishers as J. Hoover & Sons. This means nothing about the print other than at one time it was listed in a stock list or catalog and identified by the publisher with the number. It adds no value to the print and is unrelated to the fine art “numbered prints” discussed above.

81 comments:

  1. I purchased a print about 25 years ago at a local Art Festival it was untitled but signed 1 of 90. Today I went on the art's web-site and saw the exact same print for sale now titled and numbered 1 of 100. Your thoughts/comments regarding this practice?
    RS, Ormond Beach Florida

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have never heard of any such thing and it certainly sounds like something fishy is going on. The whole concept of numbering a print is that that is all there are of the prints. I suppose if an artist made a significant change to the plate so that, in effect, a new print was made, it would be legitimate to renumber the new state of the print, but this does not sound like that was done.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Is having a particular number on a print more "valuable"? For example, is #1/100 and/or #100/100 more valuable than any other numbers?

    ReplyDelete
  4. There is no definite answer to this, but I would say that in general it would be easier to sell #1/100, even if not necessarily for more money. Some collectors do like to have a particular number, but there is no clear financial difference in general for such numbers.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I hae a signed print numbered 'xxx/600'. How do I interpret the number? I haven't found any reference to the 'xxx' in the discussions and explainations on numbering prints.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am sorry to say I have never seen that. My only guess is that this print was one of more than 600 printed off so they put in the XXX, but that is just a guess.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks so much for your very informative blog, Chris.
    I understand the numbering system on prints however, what does "ed" mean..as in ed./150.

    ReplyDelete
  8. That means the print was issued in an edition of 150 impressions.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thank you, Chris. Does that mean that the next print after the ed/150 would be 1/150 and that the ed print would be the first impression?
    Thank you again.
    pa Dickson

    ReplyDelete
  10. As I understand it, it means that the prints were not numbered; that every print was a "ed/150"

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks Chris,
    All my Eugene E. Loving prints are "ed/150" and "ed/200, so I appreciate the answer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I also just acquired a Eugene E Loving print and it is Ed/200 so he must have done that on a regular basis.

      FYI . . . the work is called "The Marchand Court" and it cost me $6. I hope it was a good buy :)

      Delete
    2. I have the same print and it is also marked with Ed/200.

      Delete
  12. Hello Chris,

    I have a large (over 24 inches) late nineteenth century black and white lithograph(?) of a peacock. On the bottom right it says: "Kurz & Allison" and "Chicago" under that. On the left side there appears to be a cat # 1022. Any info you can give me would be highly appreciated as I cannot find any info online.

    thank you!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is actually a fair bit about Kurz & Allison on the web, including on the Philadelphia Print Shop web site. There is nothing about your particular print as there is nothing really to say about it beyond what you can say about all their prints. They were issued for decorative purposes to be framed and hung on the wall. The firm did issue mostly colored prints, but they did publish quite a number of uncolored prints for framing as well.

      Delete
    2. O.k., thanks for the response.

      Delete
  13. Picasso's 1958 painting 'Hands with flowers' became an iconic symbol of the 60's generation. I have what I believe is called a 'first run print' numbered 123/200. Does this have any value? Haven't taken the back off yet to investigate. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks, Dave

    ReplyDelete
  14. I have a I H E inv. S. Freudeberg del. with the #4 on it. What does that mean? Is it part of a series?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It can mean all sorts of things, but I suspect it means that it was indeed either part of a series or is a print from a book/portfolio and that is the plate number.

      Delete
  15. I have a old framed 26 x30 print by Frits Thaulow with very good quality I actually thought it was an oil painting because you can see all the brush strokes and true coloring. when I removed it from the frame the paper seems very old and is spotted in the back it is signed but on the back in bottom right stamped in red Printed In Germany. I have not been able to locate anything on the web about this .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This sounds like a typical German reproduction of a painting. They do very good work, with a realistic appearance, but they are simply reproductions. Nice items to frame and enjoy, but they have only decorative value. You also will not find any information about them as they are really just commercial items.

      Delete
  16. A General question about numbered prints.

    Every once in a while I'll come across a numbered print. I don't know the artist so I don't really know if there is any value (besides whether or not I like the picture). One of them, I can't even read the signature so I haven't been able to find out anything about it. Is selling these on eBay the only way to find out how much it's worth? For Example, I purchased a numbered print (212/950) by Ernest Robertson for $40, but I don't know the title of the piece. How would I know if I made a good investment?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting question, but I think you are looking in the wrong place for value issues. The numbering of prints means nothing about value unless there is value for that artist's prints. Numbering means only that there were X number of prints and that the one you have is number Y. If no one cares about the artist's prints, who cares that, say, only 10 were made? Also, many very valuable prints were never numbered (as discussed above).

      As to value, I'll say first that selling something on ebay is not at all a good indication of value. Sure, a very famous print might bring its true value on ebay, but all the time I see prints sell for more than they are worth and also, especially with obscure artists, for far less than they are worth.

      The best way to check value is to go to one of the pricing sites on line which show you both dealer listings and auction listings. Even those are not perfect, but they are better than either the simple fact the print is numbered or what a print goes for on ebay.

      Delete
  17. I picked up a print by Will Barnet and it's signed and with artist Impresion on it. It is of his 1970 dialogue in green print. It's of the same subject just different colors. Would that make it more valuable or less than the numbered prints?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Is there something like the oldest existing/known numbered print (etch, litho, or other)?
    Maarten Nube, Leiden, Netherlands

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very interesting question. There obviously is an oldest numbered print, but I have never seen an citation on it. If you track it down, I'd be interested to learn of it.

      Delete
  19. I will try to find out more on this
    Maarten

    ReplyDelete
  20. CHRIS I HAVE VERY OLD PRINTS ..AFTER THE NAME ON THE BOTTOM LEFT ARE THE LETTERS inv.
    AND AFTER THE NAME ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT ARE THE LETTERS - inc.
    ITS FROM ITALY IF THAT HELPS ANY
    THANKS SO MUCH CHRIS

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The name on the left is the person who drew the image and the name on the right is the person who engraved the image.

      Delete
  21. Thanks you so very much Chris,,can you tell me what the inv. stands for though and also the inc.
    I was thinking invented for the inv. and incised for the inc.
    Let's see if my guess is correct?
    Thank you again for your help Chris
    Dave

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Inventor, invenit, invt., inv., in." all stand for designed by.

      "Incidit, incidebat, incid., inc." all stand for engraved by.

      If you go to the Philadelphia Print Shop web site and go to the reference library, we have a listing of all sorts of abbreviations used on prints.

      Delete
  22. Chris my prints say L:daVinci inv: on lower left and C:Lafinio inc. on the lower right..and are from the Grotesque..hand colored on laid paper..scanning one as we speak and its incredible..held to light and pretty sure I seen a watermark also..snapped pics of that and looking forward to seeing if I can figure out watermark now..wish I could post a few pics of this Chris..its insane! Hey Chris I think these are 15th or 16th century..do you think so? Do you think Lafinio engraved after davinci drawings during davinci's lifetime,,I mean while davinci was still alive?Thanks again so very much for your time and wonderful help
    Dave

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These are probably not period prints as there are lots of these around that were done later. If you can track down the watermark on the paper, that is how you can tell when the prints were made.

      Delete
    2. Thanks again Chris..the watermark I found a horse or maybe 2 horses..I researched and it looks like it is this-

      These sheets are believed to be from a mill in Fabriano, Italy
      chain laid papers c 1560 with watermarks
      This now would date them as da Vinci period pieces correct Chris?
      I have 4 more to go through yet so hopefully will get a crystal clear picture of the horse.I will keep you posted on what comes of this..thanks so very much for your help Chris

      Delete
  23. Trying to find out about a old print I bought at a sale. It has a copy right c with a circle around it and DC with the number 25 under it. Could you tell me what that means?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hi Chris

    I have what I thought could have been an original watercolor painting by John Elwyn but now I know it is a print, due to the numbering on white frame.

    The number 328 is at the top, and beneath it is the number 80/90. The title of this piece is called, "The Orchard," and it also reads John Elwyn, 1976.

    Originally, I thought it could be an original because of the appearance of water and ink markings on the back of painting. Also, in researching the works of John Elwyn I can not find anything on this particular piece. Thanks for your response!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We do not handle prints that are this recent, so really do not know Elwyn's work. However, the number at the top does not make sense for a "numbered" print in the sense that it is used in this blog, so really not sure what it going on. It is, however, clearly a print and not a watercolor (doesn't mean it isn't hand colored...)

      Delete
  25. I have two Tim McGinnis lithos from 1976, They are of a library in US. They are signed by the artist in pencil but no number. They are of the Kaukauna Library and the waterwheel there also. They are mounted together side by side I wood frame with leaves at each corner

    ReplyDelete
  26. I inherited a Pieter de Hooch print of "Interior with a woman peeling apples" which has Medici Prints no. 46 on the back. I am wondering if it has any value?

    ReplyDelete
  27. I have a print of an abstract harlequin acrobat that is numbered U8/U15. What does the U mean?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am sorry, but this is not a type of print we have come across and we do not know. Sorry we cannot help.

      Delete
  28. Chris, I have two numbered prints that have a signature in pencil that says Martha j Knight, I can not find any thing about this person or the prints. Can you please help me?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, but I am not familiar with this artist. There are a number of good books with listings of artists, so a visit to a good library might help. Good luck.

      Delete
  29. Mr. Lane I Bought a matted print and was wondering if it has any value. It is a print of the Sphinx & Pyramid. The print was taken before the Sphinx was totally excavated. Only one paw is showing. At the bottom left says (Sphinx & Pyramid Ghefren 263) on the bottom right says (J.P. Sebah) I really appreciate it if you have any information on this. Thank you Roxanne

    ReplyDelete
  30. I have an Earl Linderman piece and it says 1 of 10 does the one mean it is the orginal?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not necessarily as anyone could have written the 1 of 10 on it. However, it is a good sign and if everything else checks out then you likely have an original.

      Delete
  31. Hi Chris. I have a signed/numbered poster art print called "jugglervane" by Eileen Goldenberg, numbered 17/500. This print was used to advertise an aids event called Art For Life. From online research, I found on www.sptimes.com the following statement about this particular print, "Each year, one artist designs the event's signature work, which is replicated on posters and used to promote the auction. In 1998, Goldenberg's poster art, jugglervane, sold for $15,000". Her signature and the numbering is in what seems to be an eggplant-colored pencil. The dimensions are 22 3/16" wide x 36 1/4" high, and the frame edge along the front edges is 1/4" wide. I've contacted an appraiser in the Tampa area, where Goldenberg is well-known, and am awaiting his reply. Is there any info you can give me regarding any possible value? Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Also, on a side note, the caption under the print, but above the advertising for the Art For Life event, says, "jugglervane, an original artwork from Tampa artist Eileen Goldenberg", and the tag on the back of the poster says that it was custom framed at a frame shop in St. Petersburg, FL, which would indicate this was purchased in FL (possibly at the event or near where the artist lives?). Not sure if this is of any significance.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Hello, I have a print by Barry Leighton Jones. The print is signed on the right bottom. My question is there is no print number on the left bottom just the letters AP? Can you tell me what that means? thank you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "AP" means "artist proof" so there would be no number. How many artist proofs there were depends on the artist...

      Delete
  34. Hi, I have an 8 x 10 numbered print of the Milkmaid by Vermeer. Any details would be appreciated.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Thanks for your blog post. Question: I have a print that is numbered xx/50. What does the "xx" signify? Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Really not sure. Not a standard notation. Perhaps 20 out of 50? That, though, is just a guess.

      Delete
  36. Hello, I am interested in possibly selling an old illustration from the 1850's. It's an illustration from Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper. It's from an original paint done by J Noel Paton and it's called "Home Again". Does anyone know what the value this illustration may possibly be.

    Thank you
    Rosa

    ReplyDelete
  37. hi Chris I have a print of the picture Blue Boy on the far right hand lower bottom there is a small hand written c white in color with a small circle around it with the number 7057
    the size of a 12 by 20 and a half I can not find anything information online about Where its from nor by whom or if it holds any the value . any info would be awesome. Thank u chris. Sincerely Connie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Any print with the little copyright symbol in it will be a modern reproduction. They can be nice images, worth framing and enjoying, but they have only "decorative" value.

      Delete
  38. I have a Morris Henry Hobbs etching that says "Ed/200. Do you know what that means? Thanks for any help you can give

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That should mean that the print was printed in an edition of 200 strikes.

      Delete
  39. I have a print titled The Arrangement signed by S. Lawrence and numbered 70/250. I cannot find any info on it. Could you help? Thanks in advance, Chris.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I have a Govinder Nazran print (Me and My Brother) that is signed and numbered 6/50. The numbering is preceded by either an I or a 1 (in pencil). However, looking up the print, I saw that it was an edition of 295. I'm having no luck at all trying to find out how that could be. Any guidance you can provide would be most appreciated.

    ReplyDelete
  41. nice writing.thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Are these worth any thing? I have 2 Louis Whirter, one Santa Maria and the other Mayflower they are numbered 13/100 and 15/100. Where would I get them appraised?

    ReplyDelete
  43. I really enjoyed reading about Joseph Hoover. Your site is so helpful. Over the years I have received prints from family, but have also picked up a few here and there at antique stores. Most I have tucked away and two I have out as décor. I really don't care about their value. I just like them. Anyway, one I picked up at an old "junk shop" last week. It's a large folio. Frame is really old - and definitely as old as the print inside. The frame is two tone with a smooth inside of a blond wood frame surrounded by a highly ornate pair of outer edges (I am guessing gesso). There are ornate holes in the outer frame edge. The frame's edges are quite beat up (chippy as some would say, which is why I love it). Honestly, I bought the piece ($20) for the frame alone with the idea of removing the art and putting something else inside it. The glass is original and has that antique wavy appearance to it. Anyway, then I discovered that the print is a J. Hoover. There is no dot matrix. It looks so smooth - like paint. The paper (I slid the back of the frame [wood panels] off). The paper is very old and thick and has a sheen to its backside. Sadly, the print was heavily damaged along its bottom edge; it looks like water spots. But the subject matter is so stunning! It is a winter scene, with dark spindly trees on either side of a lake. An old woman carries a bundle on a snow covered path and there is a farmhouse in the background. I looked around online and got someone's opinion on it at "Just Ask," which apparently has some antique appraisers. Based on photos she thought it was a late 1890s print in its original frame. I am curious about the value, but more than that I really just want to know about it in terms of history. I look at it and get lost in the piece.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I have a set of Tom Caldwell pictures, one is called Birbury, and the other one is called snohill. They are signed and numbered 1/00 on the back of the frame. Please let me know if these are valuable. Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  45. What does the letter “I” mean before the numbers on a numbered print?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have not seen that so really do not know. Sorry.

      Delete
  46. I have a number at the back of my painting what means?

    ReplyDelete
  47. A REMBRANDT PRINT WITH THE NUMBER 4 ON THE TOP RIGHT CORNER. ON THE BOTTOM V Fecit INCLUDING HIS SIGNATURE AND YEAR 1639. PENCIL SIGNATURE ON REVERSE SIDE.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Hi
    I have a blue boy (#820) and pinkie (#1583) from at least 1945 (was wedding gift). They look to be prints. How do I know if they have any value?

    ReplyDelete
  49. THe numbers on your prints are inventory numbers. That is, the company would have listed the Blue Boy as #820 in its catalogue... Prints like this can be attractive, but their value is only "decorative."

    ReplyDelete
  50. I have reprint with a Cataldo Fine Arts 1942 Gainsborough Blue Boy U.S. Print #736 on the back of the frame. My father gave it to my mother in October 1945. Is it worth anything. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  51. We have a signed on front of painting with a plate XI on the back by Fredrick Remington titled 'Dash to the Timber' Would this possibly be worth more than $500 as an original artist print?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The plate number on the back indicates that it comes from a portfolio, that is, it wasn't issued as a separate print. As such, is very unlikely it has value over $500.

      Delete
  52. Hi i have a art piece with the following. Type 6995 size 16x20. What dies type mean please

    ReplyDelete
  53. This is probably a catalogue number from the company that made the print. That way if you are a gallery, you could just call the company and order a copy of 6995. I haven't seen "type" before, but that is what numbers on prints like this usually mean.

    ReplyDelete
  54. I purchased a series of signed prints by Graciela Rodo-Boulanger. On the left corner are x/x, but you can tell there were numbers there because you can see where the numbers were erased. What would this mean? Does in diminish their value?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hard to say. My guess is that this was going to be a numbered print but ended up not being (this is just a guess). It shouldn't hurt the value, but will not enhance it either.

      Delete
  55. Hello - I just purchased a Claude Monet limited edition on paper art piece. It is numbered 113/100 on the back. Why is the first number larger than the total number of copies? Seems weird

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Doesn't make any sense, does it. Any "limited edition" prints of master painters, like Monet, are probably not actually limited at all (other than by how many they can sell). In most cases a numbered print only really adds value if it is signed by the original artist. This is probably a nicely done print, but I wouldn't place much concern in its being "limited."

      Delete
  56. Hello. I am trying to get some information on pieces in my late father’s house. I am looking at a framed linen matted signed Chagall numbered 35/150 titled Sirene au poete. It has hung in my fathers house for over a decade but when we googled it, we got a hit for the same numbered piece having sold at auction in 2017. Any insight?

    ReplyDelete
  57. Sorry, but this is not at all the type of item we handle nor know much about.

    ReplyDelete