OCR Text |
Show 26 watercolors cannot be the only criterion for judging their worth. It is here that one of the main difficulties in previous examinations becomes evident. In the past, attributes of the watercolors and of the aquatints have often been discussed interchangeably. Without any clear differentiation between the two, the aquatints were necessarily judged by criteria set up for discussions of the watercolors alone. Therefore, before any valid judgment can be made, it must first be acknowledged that the aquatints are separate from the watercolors, in as much as they are images produced through a different medium and for a different purpose. Conversion of the watercolors into a different medium-aquatint--necessarily guaranteed a loss of immediacy, one of the primary advantages of watercolor. Further, until the time that lithography (and soon photography) replaced it in the mid-nineteenth century, aquatint was the best means of converting watercolor into the multiple images used in book illustration, although it still retained many inherent limitations as a reproductive medium J The very process that allowed the delicate tonal gradations of the watercolor to be reproduced also limited the number of impressions that could be pulled from a plate before the image needed reworking. Many of the changes in the images seen in Bodmer's aquatints were due to this limitation and must be kept in mind when evaluating the reproductive accuracy of individual prints. In fairness, Bodmer's aquatints, regardless of the states, must also be compared with other aquatints produced about the same time. In this case, his aquatints are very good indeed-both as documents and as works of art. |