Suitable for framing (but at what level?)

Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 05:10 pm
In a true example of physician heal thyself I am getting new floors installed in my house (don't try this at home (unless you can move out for several weeks (what a mess))).

So anyways.

I have to move every single thing to some other area of my house for the duration so mostly I'm throwing things away.

While cleaning out an old flat file that hasn't been opened for probably 15 years I came across something ineresting: some beautiful prints that Mr. B had apparantly stashed in there a long, long time ago.

Here is what I can tell you about the prints.

They are in a portfolio that reads:

"Jo Mora's (aka J.J. Mora) watercolor collection of hopi kachina and ceremonial figures.

Complete collection included in the Smithsonian Institution's traveling exhibit "The Year of the Hopi".

The prints are 16x20.

One is called "Sho-Yep Katchina (left handed Katchina) Hopi - East Aiesa 1904"

It is numbered 300/650

Also numbered #39.

The second print is called "See-Peek-Nich [Hopi] East Mesa 1904

It is also numbered 300/650

And #19

I'm guessing that the second number indicates how many prints were in the origninal collection so we can assume that there were at least 39.

I don't notice any plate marks and, the numbering didn't seem to leave indentations in the paper (very heavy stock).

They are really beautiful prints so I thought I would get them framed -- but would it be okay to go for budget or should I consider expensive/archival?

Thanks for any help you can provide!
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,196 • Replies: 10
No top replies

Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 06:18 pm
Well, I'd certainly use acid free materials and keep the print away from the glass with that strip stuff framers use to do it with, but I don't know if it would be wise to use the very best/most expensive glass or not. (There's a thread somewhere in the art forum on the glasses - you may already know about them.)

Lightwizard wouid probably have an opinion..
0 Replies
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 06:25 pm
They're apparently numbered prints by a dead artist. Go more expensive rather than less, IMO.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 06:31 pm
The single numbers(#39) were probably the sequential numbers of a series of originals from which the prints were made. The fraction is the print number out of a total number of prints run 360 /600 (it means you have print no, 360 out of a total run of 600).
NAtive AMerican Arts are now rather hot, the Smithsonian Museum of the American Indian is one of the best resource centers. They have a computer bank on their second floor just chocka block with all kinds of info about NAtive American tribes, customs, language, and artists.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 06:51 pm
Check this out!:

64. MORA, Jo[seph Jacinto]. Jo Mora's Watercolor Collection of Hopi Kachina and Ceremonial Figures. Tulsa, 1979. Collection of 8 colored lithograph plates on rag paper in original portfolios. Fine.

First edition, limited edition (#598 of 650 copies). Perceiving the Hopi were the last Native Americans to preserve the integrity of their ceremonies, Mora created this valuable ethnological record of Hopi ceremonial dress. Dr. Frederick J. Dockstader, author of Indian Art in America, in his appraisal of Mora's paintings stated: "They represent a unique record of Hopi Indian religious ceremonies of the period; their value is represented by the careful detail and aesthetic appeal, as created by one of the outstanding Southwestern artists of the day." Mora (1876-1947) was born in Uruguay, studied art in New York and Boston, worked as a cowboy on California ranches in 1903, and spent two years among the Hopi and Navaho, learning their language and observing their ceremonies. For more on Mora, see Samuels, Artists of the American West. ($1,500-3,000)

I have this one:

And the fifth one on here (lower left):

So I'm thinking -- the more expensive framing would be better. At the low end they might be worth a couple of hundred bucks each.

I wonder if the Smithsonian could give me more info.....

How fun is this to find in some old cabinet!
0 Replies
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 06:55 pm
you could be onto something boomer


note the retail value.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 07:03 pm
here also may be worth looking at

0 Replies
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 07:40 pm

This is fun!!

I know this probably sounds silly but Mr. B and my 18 year anniversary is tomorrow. I was feeling kind of low because for the first time in all of those years I'm not working and I couldn't get him a gift without blowing my cover since he sees all of the expenses. We aren't big gift givers but you know... you like to do something....

So maybe now I can present him with a little research...

A little treasure hunt kind of thing....

At least until he groans at the price to frame the prints .......

I'm a lucky girl!

Thank you all for your help and for anything else you can add.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 07:45 pm
This is all great news..
0 Replies
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 07:46 pm
Wow, that's great! I was already reading along with interest (though without anything helpful to add), but the anniversary angle is really cool.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 08:16 pm
go archival at all costs

the images have great colour and presence

something simple, maybe just mounted on top of an archival backing board, wth a simple gold metal shadow box frame to keep the glass of the print

don't use a non reflective glass, something to block uv possibly, but just keeping them out of direct light is usually enough to prevent fading

used to work as a picture framer about 16 years ago, and even though i often experimented with some crazy intricate ideas, i always think that simple is best, let the art work speak for itself
0 Replies

Related Topics

  1. Forums
  2. » Suitable for framing (but at what level?)
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/02/2023 at 03:55:52