"society For Italic Handwriting" Journal

[TXKat]

Thanks for the link. I did some snooping and I like what's there!!!

[caliken]

Columba Livia

 

As you seem inordinately interested in the background to my work, here's a breakdown of some of my working

methods and procedures.

 

If the work is for reproduction, most calligraphers retouch their work to some extent, and I'm no exception in

that regard. However, being a 75 year old dinosaur, I continue to use the old, time-honoured method which I've

used since long before Personal Computers appeared; namely with white gouache, black ink, scissors, a scalpel

and paste. I've been using this method since 1955 and see no good reason to change now. Therefore, all my work

is hand-produced and no further retouching, mechanical or otherwise is necessary.

 

I've always taken it as a given, that most artwork intended for reproduction, will be retouched as required. It's

never occurred to me that this might need an explanation, as it seems such an obvious thing to do, and I find it

hard to believe that anyone would think otherwise.

Having said that, it seems entirely reasonable to me, that some would prefer to use the computer to retouch/edit their

work; I just prefer the old way.

 

After scanning, I import the image to Photoshop to re-size the Jpeg and upload to FPN.

I have a passing interest in conventional photography, and use Photoshop for that purpose.

 

One-off work is entirely different and has to be right first time, or re-done from scratch. Only the most minor

retouching, such as additional hairlines or squaring off of letters, is possible. In any case, as this prestigious

type of work is usually produced on heavyweight Artboard or on Calfskin Vellum, editing or retouching by personal

computer is out of the question. This also applies to lettering on gold leaf tablets for Art Galleries.

 

My original lettering for the cover of the Journal was black & white and I felt that it looked better that way,

so I photocopied my original, pasted on the letters SIH, cut it out with scissors and tacked it temporarily in

position, completely covering the central square, before scanning.

 

Lastly, my Calligraphy is not an Art but a Craft requiring no particular, natural talent. As such, it can be learned

by anyone.

 

Ken

Edited October 4, 2014 by Ken Fraser

[cellmatrix]

Its really a treat to have both the original black as well as the printed brown versions of the script. I like the black better personally. Columba Livia thanks for asking Ken about this, I found his explanations as to how he works very interesting. Keep up the great work Ken!

[Bronze]

Ken, would love to see some examples of your work on Calfskin Vellum, and hear a bit about that type of work. It would deserve a seperate thread though.

[Tasmith]

You'll find all the information you need, here

http://www.italic-handwriting.org/

 

This example was printed in the Mach 2011 issue.

 

 

Thanks for the link!

Edited October 4, 2014 by Tasmith

[Mickey]

I've always taken it as a given, that most artwork intended for reproduction, will be retouched as required. It's

never occurred to me that this might need an explanation, as it seems such an obvious thing to do, and I find it

hard to believe that anyone would think otherwise.

 

 

Ken,

 

I can appreciate Columba's request. This forum (or at least the little Penmanship corner of it) it is not really a showcase for the promotion of commercial works by living craftsmen / artists. That's not to say that such are unwelcome here, merely my observation that many if not most of us in the penmanship forum hope to learn something from the posts (and pass on what we know). Seeing the unaltered product of the calligrapher's hand presents more realistic goals and educational value than adulterated materials. Modification (improvement) by means other than the pen really should be noted, otherwise the posts lose their 'educational' value and become mere marketing or promotional materials. Even something as innocent as adjusting contrast and exposure alters the line quality.

 

From a strictly personal perspective, I can 'see' a lot more of the pen technique employed in the photo reproductions in Michael Sull's books and on the IAMPETH site than I can in most of your scans. This makes them less useful to me. I can admire them, even enjoy them, but I don't learn much from them.

Edited October 4, 2014 by Mickey

[cellmatrix]

I agree with Mickey thoughtful comments. While finished polished stuff is beautiful, more raw "work in progress" material would be most welcome and educational. I think we all learn a lot more about a work of art if we can see it being produced. The difference is like listening to a highly produced music recording versus going to a concert and experiencing the musical interplay firsthand, the frets used for the notes, the raw (un-lipsynced) sound of the vocalist etc.

[View from the Loft]

I admire Ken's work, and can only dream of producing formal italic as regular and well formed as his work. I also admire the work of others, and have seen superb work posted by Mickey and other posters on FPN.

 

I appreciate the explanation provided by Ken as to the differences between the cover seen in post one, and the covers posted by others. To me, it was abundantly obvious from post one that there was some editing going on as you can see the different paper/background colour at the spine of the journal, but this doesn't stop me being able to appreciate the handwriting.

 

Please don't let this degenerate into personal attacks. We will all lose if this happens, but we can all learn from objective discussions.

[caliken]

Seeing the unaltered product of the calligrapher's hand presents more realistic goals and educational value than adulterated materials. Modification (improvement) by means other than the pen really should be noted, otherwise the posts lose their 'educational' value and become mere marketing or promotional materials. Even something as innocent as adjusting contrast and exposure alters the line quality.

Mickey,

 

Point taken, but there's a fundamental issue here, which makes my viewpoint a little different from yours. When I'm talking about producing my lettering entirely by hand, I mean the whole process - the basic writing and, if necessary, retouching with a crowquill and/or white gouache or black ink. I see this as a complete operation - a handwritten project.

 

I would never dream of showing my writing in an unfinished state any more than you would expect to see a painting before completion. It's probably significant that my favourite handwriting by far, is the engraved (retouched) versions in The Universal Penman. For me, very, very few pieces of writing look as good in their raw state as they do after a little tidying up, and I consider this retouching to be an integral part of one and the same process. This is what I mean when I say that my work is produced entirely by hand.

 

When I'm doing a large piece of one-off writing such as a scroll for presentation which may take several hours, or even days, very little retouching is possible and I don't enjoy the extra tension this involves.

 

I've never been particularly interested in my work being considered of educational value and I've never been involved in teaching, although I have been approached from time to time.

 

I don't see that adjusting the contrast level during scanning, has any great bearing on the integrity of the final result.

 

In the final reckoning, how it looks on paper, is all that really matters.

 

Ken

Edited October 4, 2014 by Ken Fraser

[Mickey]

Mickey,

 

Point taken, but there's a fundamental issue here, which makes my viewpoint a little different from yours. When I'm talking about producing my lettering entirely by hand, I mean the whole process - the basic writing and, if necessary, retouching with a crowquill and/or white gouache or black ink. I see this as a complete operation - a handwritten project.

 

I would never dream of showing my writing in an unfinished state any more than you would expect to see a painting before completion. It's probably significant that my favourite handwriting by far, is the engraved (retouched) versions in The Universal Penman. For me, very, very few pieces of writing look as good in their raw state as they do after a little tidying up, and I consider this retouching to be an integral part of one and the same process. This is what I mean when I say that my work is produced entirely by hand.

 

 

 

Ken,

 

Allow me to suggest respectfully that you reconsider your policy. I spent most of my career years as a performing artist and I'd have never thought of showing unfinished work to the customer, i.e., the audience, but works in progress (rehearsals) were frequently open to colleagues and to colleagues in the making, i.e., students. It was considered part of giving back to the profession, part of paying ones dues. On the other hand, if you view your fellow members on FPN as customers, you're probably right not to show your work product. Again respectfully, are we posting here simply to show off or to inspire, share, and learn?

[caliken]

Mickey,

 

Thanks for your input.

 

I've never given this much thought, and I am unsure as to my views on the subject. Certainly, "Policy" is too strong as, I've never considered any formal structure as to my work and how I approach it.

 

I can understand and appreciate your admirable attitude concerning "giving back to the profession, part of paying ones dues" but I am cursed as a perfectionist and am appalled at the idea of my unfinished work being seen by anyone.

 

Occasionally, I have had feedback concerning my posts as having been useful, and this pleases me. However, if I'm to be totally honest, my feelings have probably more to do with self-gratification than the magnanimous giving to others. However, I can only hope that "inspire, share and learn" come into the equation, somewhere.

 

Ken

Edited October 5, 2014 by Ken Fraser

[dms525]

I fully respect Ken's sense of artistic integrity. It highlights the differences in motives for following this forum and sheds light on a frustration I have experienced. It seems to me there are three, but I may be missing some.

 

Ken is in "professional artist/craftsman mode." I infer from his contributions he enjoys sharing his fine productions and has generously shared his techniques when asked about them.

 

Other's are here to improve their penmanship and, perhaps, learn a new script for a variety of reasons. This is why I am here, for example. I have no hope of achieving Ken's level of perfection or amazing repertoire of scripts, but I would like to develop an ever-improving, personal, legible, pleasing to look at cursive italic hand. I enjoy sharing my progress and also helping those with similar strivings, when I can.

 

The third motive I see is interest in paleography or the history of scripts. I have some interest in that area as well.

 

Conflict arises when a member with one agenda, for example, displaying virtuosity, participates in a topic where the others have an entirely different agenda, for example, getting help with their own penmanship.

 

All three agendas, in my view, are entirely worthy. I would hate to lose any of these types of participation. I think we just need to be circumspect about where we contribute what type of input.

 

That's my view, anyway.

 

David

[cellmatrix]

Ken, I value your contributions to this forum in whatever way you care to make them. Keep up the great work!

 

Edited October 6, 2014 by cellmatrix

[ThreeForMe]

I'm quite taken aback by the negativity and churlish behavior in this thread.

 

Ken, thank you for posting your work. I find it inspiring as I work on my own handwriting.

[caliken]

David, Cellmatrix, ThreeForAll,

 

Thanks!

 

Ken

[Bronze]

Ken, I sure do value your contributions here, even if it's maybe more about providing inspiration rather than a tutorial. (And seeing your work here a few years back was what made me start working on my handwriting, as well as discovering the world of calligraphy. I remember showing it to my parents, waving my laptop around, going "Have you seen this? Look at it, it's incredible!!")

 

And let's not forget that Ken has instructional books available as well as videos on youtube etc. showing him write in a number of different scripts.

 

Having said that, I would also love to see some step by step guides, or work in a rawer form, but if not your posts are still one of my favourite things about this forum.

Edited October 7, 2014 by Bronze

[Maurizio]

I too am grateful for Mr. Fraser's contributions to this forum and disappointed by the harsh tone of some comments here.

 

Mr. Fraser provides an inspiration for many of us and a standard against which to measure our own efforts in calligraphy, and he does so by sharing information openly and with humility.

 

Thank you Mr. Fraser for posting this, and please, keep it up.

Edited January 26, 2015 by Maurizio

[Tasmith]

I too am grateful for Mr. Fraser's contributions to this forum and disappointed by the harsh tone of some comments here.

 

Mr. Fraser provides an inspiration for many of us and a standard against which to measure our own efforts in calligraphy, and he does so by sharing information openly and with humility.

 

Thank you Mr. Fraser for posting this, and please, keep it up.

+1

[Lively]

I too am grateful for Mr. Fraser's contributions to this forum and disappointed by the harsh tone of some comments here.

Mr. Fraser provides an inspiration for many of us and a standard against which to measure our own efforts in calligraphy, and he does so by sharing information openly and with humility.

Thank you Mr. Fraser for posting this, and please, keep it up.

+2

[smk]

There has been enough show of support for Ken in this forum IMO. This thread has veered far off topic. Kindly keep future posts on topic.

 

Salman