John Leech print, repro, thing

I bought this earlier. I was intrigued as soon as I saw it then spied the signature. Not sure what to make of it. It's definitely John Leech, be it repro, print, signed print or however I might describe it. The writing at the bottom on the mount is on a seperate from the art work though. How would I describe this? Would Leech have produced his own prints in this way? Art work is just stuck onto the backing without a real border.

 

https://www.bonhams.com/auction/119...17-1864-british-a-shocking-young-lady-indeed/

Isn't this what you have?

Debora

 

I'm not sure. I'm not very good at identifying formats. The link you provided describes it as

John Leech (1817-1864) British
A shocking young lady indeed, chromolithograph on wove, published by Thos Agnew & Sons, 1865, (I) 53 x 72.5cm (21 x 28½in).

It appears to bebhand coloured but I'm not sure. I can't see any repetitive pattern. The writing at the bottom seems to be ink but I don't know. Confused.

 

@mirana might we have your opinion on this piece & the letter style ? The only thing that looks odd to me is the cursive style handwritten caption-I'd guess,and this is just a quick off the top of my head leap,most captioning back then would've been in a serif letterpress typeface,there must've been exceptions though (?).
PS- IMHO, the wrting at the bottom looks printed,but you have the article in hand.

 

I don't see anything that would indicate it is not a chromolithograph print. Other examples say it was published by "Thomas Agnew and Sons Ltd, engraver and publisher", 1865. Is there any indication of a publisher on yours?

Sometimes different printing methods might be used to produce the colored image vs text, which might explain the marriage of 2 pieces of paper. However, both look like they were produced by lithography - meaning the signature is not actually handwritten.

Leech appears to have done both an oil painting version of the scene as well as a watercolor. The chromolithographs would have been a popularized version of the artwork.

https://www.hemswell-antiques.com/a...colour-shocking-young-lady-indeed-101867.html

 

On closer examination yes it could well all be printed.

 

I saw a reference to the oil painting on a Bonham's listing of a print. There are publisher details in the bottom right hand corner. 'Agnew & sons"

 

Yes indeed!

 

Agreed with @2manybooks that this is chromolithography. Colors were provided by use of separate plates and you can see the registration is quite off...especially looking at the boy and how his outline is shifted from the color. With the duplicate @Debora found, we can see that everything is the same, including the writing.

Sure, most of prints from this period used letter press for text. This is a creative substitution and may have been the artist's idea in order to make the print seem like "real" art to increase sales.

 

Thanks for info. Well it fooled me so there ye go. I can identify more modern prints than have the seperate cells of colour. You can see the repetitive pattern even with the naked eye. I struggle with older prints like this though. They look more similar to paying or ink applied directly to the paper.

 

Not all prints have halftone. Prints made with plates, lino, screen, or blocks (still done today) will be flat inks or paint, and are generally* worth more than a digital/halftone print as there is still a human component to making them. You can look for brush strokes but even that can fool you... They printed on canvas in this period too, plus made the clear top coat have brush strokes, and then there's "retouched" prints that have a little bit of real paint on top for accents. They don't make it easy!


*When other factors are similar. Obviously artist, age, style, etc. make a difference in pricing.

 

Ha ha. No they don't. Needs a trained eye!

 

For interest, the BM collection has a few of the Leech/Agnew chromolithographs, including this one https://www.britishmuseum.org/colle...ograph&view=grid&sort=object_name__asc&page=1

 

Thanks for the link. He was indeed a prolific artist

 

I bought a John Leech print-repro-thing today
It's from Punch Magazine. I've only found b/w versions online.



The British Museum version: