Is it correct to refer to some of Edvard Munch’s The Scream versions as ‘chromolithographs’? I’ve only ever seen these versions referred to as lithographs.
Which version? A chromolithograph uses a bunch of different colours. If you just take a normal black-and-white lithograph and then tint it by hand, that is a different process.
There was only one lithograph version Munch made of The Scream. That was his lithograph of 1895. Can it be termed a chromolithograph?
I believe that was just an (ordinary) lithograph.
Thanks DPRK.
I’ve done stone lithography, and my wife has a degree in fine arts printmaking. We’d just call it a lithograph, no matter how many colors the artist used.
Strictly speaking, you wouldn’t be incorrect to call it a chromolithograph, but that’s usually thought of as a mass production printing printing process used to print thousands of examples, and they’re all supposed to be exactly the same. Fine arts prints are usually just a few dozen prints, sometimes a few hundred. Since they’re normally hand inked, some variation in the print is accepted and sometimes desired.
My point was that, as far as I know, it was a black-and-white lithograph, and that if he colored some of the prints he did so by hand.
Ya know, I’m not sure if he did any color lithos of The Scream. All of the versions I can find that aren’t paint or pastel are indeed black and white.
In my defense, he did do color lithos, such as The Sin.