By popular demand my wife and I have decided to officially offer prints of our work, but only from an original that has sold. We have been selling quite a few prints of sold pieces lately, by word of mouth with nothing offered overtly on the web or in any galleries. The question is not whether to offer prints or not, that has already been decided.
So...the questions is, should we just call them a print, or the supposedly "made up" artsy schmartzy term Giclée? The main reason we are leaning towards Giclée is because we also do original printmaking "prints" - copper plate intaglio, drypoint, wood and lino cuts, monotypes and more. We want to have a clear differentiation of the two types of prints since the Giclée's will be sold for a fraction of the cost of an original printmaking print and an even smaller fraction of the cost of an original painting.
So...the questions is, should we just call them a print, or the supposedly "made up" artsy schmartzy term Giclée? The main reason we are leaning towards Giclée is because we also do original printmaking "prints" - copper plate intaglio, drypoint, wood and lino cuts, monotypes and more. We want to have a clear differentiation of the two types of prints since the Giclée's will be sold for a fraction of the cost of an original printmaking print and an even smaller fraction of the cost of an original painting.