Comment by Angostura
6 days ago
For many works, even the best photographs don't entirely capture the physical object - particularly those where texture, including brush strokes is important. Many pigments can't be duplicated via the standard printing gamut. This particular work is a woodblock print, so perhaps photography is adequate - I don't know.
I'm not clear that the original artist's materials, with respect to longevity is really relevant, assuming the artist didn't explicitly intend it to be ephemeral.
Tangentially I saw this exhibition in Tokyo on modern ukiyo-e https://www.tnm.jp/modules/r_free_page/index.php?id=2693&lan... and I was blown away by the incredible level of detail the artists were able to pack into woodblock print. From a distance it looks almost like print, but up close you can really see the textures, and interestingly also the physical limitations compared to real print (the colors being layered by individually carved woodblocks).
With that being said, I’m sure they could make a replica that would be almost impossible to tell apart from the real. After all, this technique was specifically invented for mass production.
> assuming the artist didn't explicitly intend it to be ephemeral.
Is there another option? Even sculpture hewn from rock is ephemeral.