It's a very old form of art. The image is sculpted in negative and reverse into a block of wood. Then ink is laid down on the wood, and is then pressed onto a sheet of paper where the image becomes a positive. It's a very cool artform.
It would be more expensive initially in time, and I'm sure you'd charge more per shirt, but it would all average out over time.
I'm not trying to cheapen this awesoem artform at all, but for those that don't understand it, you can liken it to modern rubber stamps. You get the stamp made, you put ink on the stamp, and you press it on your substrate.
The difference is the distinctive look of a woodcut (which, yes, CAN be simulated), and the knowledge of the way these shirts would be produced.
M.C. Escher used to use this method a lot for his work.
Yeah, doing shirts with woodcuts would be a bit more expensive (particularly because of the time-consuming nature of actually MAKING the woodcuts), but I'm not trying to mass-produce them or make any money (though a couple of bucks would be alright, you know). At the moment, it's just for my own edification.
Also, from my understanding, woodcut shirts are better quality (in general) than screened shirts. They have little/no hand and last much longer, due to the nature of the application of ink.
Also, from my understanding, woodcut shirts are better quality (in general) than screened shirts. They have little/no hand and last much longer, due to the nature of the application of ink.
When you say woodcut, i want to be sure you mean that the raised area of the wood would transfer the ink and the carved portion would not transfer ink. This would be similar to a rubber stamp or flexographic printing.
My concern would be the ability to transfer enough ink onto a fabric while at the same time having any level of detail. I'd suggest using rubber stamps for small scale testing, then ramp up.
Soft hand isn't the nature of the process, but a function of what type and amount of ink being transfered. White shirts are easy to turn black and have a very soft hand. In the case of sublimation, it won't have any hand at all! For printing on dark, the ink needs to either sit over top of the dark fabric or bleach out the black color.
From an artistic standpoint, i love the look of woodcuts. One project i'm going to work on when i have the time is to write a program to convert images into woodcuts instead of halftones. A couple commercial progams already exists, i don't like their results. Probably the best software woodcut style image is the filter the wall street journal uses for its b&w photographs.
Whoever does the images at the wsj is a genius! Next time you see a journal, look carefully at the images of people. With careful examination, it is obvious when they want you to like the person in the photograph verses casting a negative image.
woodcut is a good look. The primary reason for LPI screens is the ease at which they could be created. With a little software and creativity, there are many ways to create toned imaged.
That's what I mean by woodcut. I'm not sure what else it could imply. And yes, it's more than possible to get fine details on a shirt via block printing. Just look at the shirts from tugboat printing (among other great shirts I've seen done this way):
You're right, it is easy to create screens, which is why I want to work with woodcuts. It makes the process feel less industrial, and gives it more of an artisan-like atmosphere. Obviously, there is plenty of creativity and artistry involved in screening shirts, but it seems that it's even moreso the case making woodcuts by hand for the shirts.
Also, my understanding was because there was much more pressure and full coverage (i.e. no breaks in the image a la a screen) involved in block printing shirts, the ink is integrated into the fabric more thoroughly, hence the soft hand. Either way on that, I know that it leads to a sturdier product.
And yes, it's more than possible to get fine details on a shirt via block printing. Just look at the shirts from tugboat printing (among other great shirts I've seen done this way):
Yes, the polar bear is the sort of quality easily possible with wood cutting, but it is not my definition of fine detail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbeard
You're right, it is easy to create screens, which is why I want to work with woodcuts. It makes the process feel less industrial, and gives it more of an artisan-like atmosphere. Obviously, there is plenty of creativity and artistry involved in screening shirts, but it seems that it's even moreso the case making woodcuts by hand for the shirts.
Art is probably the best reason to do woodcuts. As for final output look and feel, a properly scanned woodcut print would make shirt which looked just like the print.
of course it would look the same, but that takes all the fun out of it. the amount of detail i want in the designs i have done thus far is easily achievable from woodcut.
also, my understanding of intaglio is that it was reserved for metal plates, and not wood. i mean, i'm assuming it CAN be done (though likely with a reduction of quality). but i've never seen anything actually using wood for intaglio printing, hence my comment (that in hindsight sounded a bit harsh, but wasn't intended to be).
of course it would look the same, but that takes all the fun out of it. the amount of detail i want in the designs i have done thus far is easily achievable from woodcut.
I've got a friend who is in a band. The leader of the band is also the cover artist for the CD's. The art for each CD is created using multi color linoleum cutting prints. One of the resulting prints is scanned and is used to by a printer to print the actual cd inserts using process color. The reason the cd's looks good is because an artist put time in to make it look that way.
i've watched that video. it was pretty helpful in terms of the big steps (most of which i had kinda figured out from transfering knowledge of block printing on paper to blockprinting on shirts), but i was really hoping for specific tips that i don't want to have to learn the hard way.
btw, would you happen to have a link to that band's site/their album artwork. i do an album design blog with a friend, and i'd like to feature it on there. even if it sucks (which it probably doesn't), it would be nice to have on there due to the nature of the process involved.
Printing with woodcuts 
