712:
51:
780:
1364:
Similarly surely it can be argued that Adachi displayed creativity in their selection, for example, of printing inks. The very act of printing, as I'm sure you know and will concede, is a creative one. Imagine a small museum in the US somewhere. They have a number of
Japanese prints and generate useful income (or did until Knowledge (XXG) arrived) on selling poster reproductions. The museum Director has a wheeze: why not lift a few Adachi prints into a glossy little souvenir? Handy income and no royalties to pay. Somehow I can't see it, even in the US. Can you really?
457:
1503:'s work, which had come into PD in Europe but not (generally) into the US because of URAA considerations. I was astonished to find that these Fair Use images could not be copied to the Netherlands, French of German, the countries most associated with her, wikis because (so it seems) they only allow uploads from Commons (later in the year I was able to upload some images of hers to Commons given the dispensation there about URAA). Here's a link to
1080:, in the 19th century they were printed in edtions of a few hundred at a time, and the superstars such as Hiroshige could sell perhaps as many as 5–10,000 copies of their most popular prints. I seem to remember reading elsewhere that many earlier prints were special commissions, for exclusive private clubs and whatnot, in editions of possibly as low as single digits.
1907:
973:
918:
826:
728:
1037:—who was known to employ lavish printing techniques such as dusting the backgrounds with mica. Remember, the audience for these prints were not poor farmers, but the wealthy urban bourgeois who could afford to spend their time and money whoring in the pleasure districts—people who had larger incomes than those in the ruling samurai class.
837:
shape of the nose, and the placement of the ears. At the same time he retained a stylized, ideal beauty characterized by oblong faces and small eyes and mouths.Three
Beauties demonstrates three new developments in Japanese printmaking that Utamaro helped make popular during the Edo period: the use of the so-called "big head" composition (
1960:
1938:
1920:
1891:
1867:
1843:
1821:
1804:
1784:
1722:
1697:
1683:
1665:
1646:
1626:
1604:
1571:
1542:
1521:
1489:
1464:
1432:
1402:
1373:
1348:
1323:
1308:
1285:
1265:
1247:
1205:
1188:
1160:
1139:
1091:
1067:
1048:
1018:
985:
960:
939:
905:
875:
855:
819:
765:
748:
699:
670:
645:
627:
585:
565:
547:
525:
503:
485:
440:
397:
379:
355:
332:
297:
255:
216:
193:
175:
150:
1473:
Well, I'll lose whatever faith I have in copyright if you turn out to be right (the very idea seems to spit in the face of the spirit of
American copyright laws), but keep in mind that Japanese copyright only extends for fifty years for corporate works, so any of these reproductions whose blocks were
891:
that the colour of this print is too mauve/pink all over. The grey here is a warm pinkish grey. It should be a cool grey (not blue grey either but slightly yellowed, if anything). The overall colour cast needs tweaking slightly. It just mean that by whatever process this was reproduced, the balance
1706:
Well I do, serious answer. But only entry level gear and basically for family snaps. I do know that photographing 2-D objects involves creative choices, hence all the discussion on this forum about various versions. The idea that 3-D photographs are somehow more creative is fairly absurd in my view.
1555:
museums were amongst the most vociferous in protecting them) because we instinctively recognise that they don't really own those rights on work that have come into the public domain, it's a different matter when it comes to restorations ("facsimiles"), which is a niche industry in the art world and
1382:
I don't see how the oranges of Adobe can be compared to the grapes (sorry) of these reprints. It's long been held that faithful reproductions of 2D works acquire no new copyright in the US; this includes attempts to best recreate how a work originally looked. As such, even Adam's claim to copyright
1332:
They couldn't possibly be under copyright—there's no creative element to them, which is the basis under which you can obtain copyright. For those who don't know what Adachi is about: The company was founded in 1926 to reproduce ukiyo-e prints using the original techniques—this means they re-carved
1294:
I do support the original. It meets all the criteria. I can't help thinking that there's a small galaxy of images out there that in fact meet the requirements, but so long as they come in and we keep up I don't see why we shouldn't support them. I would also support a knowledgeable restoration such
1193:
Oh, I suspected this, but didn't want to just guess---according to the Adachi page, the whole background is dusted with mica, which gives a glittery effect that I image would never show up in a scan---though there's usually a certain quality to the scans that tells you it's one of those mica-dusted
1588:
But he ruled that the plaintiff, by its own admission, had performed "slavish copying", which did not qualify for copyright protection. "ndeed", he elaborated, "the point of the exercise was to reproduce the underlying works with absolute fidelity". He noted that "t is uncontested that
Bridgeman's
836:
Kitagawa
Utamaro's interest in physiognomy, —the study of an individual's facial features as an indication of their character—helped lead to his skill at subtly altering the features of each face to create a sense of portraiture and individuality, such as the position and spacing of the eyes, the
1420:
suggests the threshold is higher than it is in the States, and we know the States has a higher threshold than the UK (no "sweat of the brow" stuff). On top of that, the
Library of Congress has made available a pile of Adachi prints noted "Rights Advisory: No known restrictions on publication."
1363:
because of another debate I took part in on
Knowledge (XXG). That case was about copying fonts and the Court upheld the plaintiff (on the distinctly curious grounds in my estimation) that the plaintiff displayed creativity in selecting control points for their Bezier splines (smoothing curves).
1511:
published by the
Trianon press for the William Blake Society. At this dealer it's offered for ÂŁ975 and there are numeous other facsimile edition, some of them very expensive indeed and sought by coillectors, of Blake's other works. The point is that indeed there's an industry in these kinds of
997:
prints really don't keep well. Not only does the cheap newspaper quality paper tone a lot, the everyday printers' inks employed were also cheap and hopelessly fugitive. These prints were not destined for the fine art market but for popular consumption. That pale chestnut-marooon (ubiquitous in
1613:
Yes, but I'm saying the underlying work (the Adachi restoration) shouldn't be regarded as public domain in the first place. I haven't studied this judgment, but glancing at it (if I recall correctly) much was made about the evolution of the photographic process, that originally it was thought
1655:
What I really meant that is that it's perverse to say that photos of 3-D images are somehow more creative than photos of 2-D images. I would like to see that imaging of any PD work by any means doesn't attract fresh copyright, but that would be strictly *imaging* and not the recreation or
1444:
The paradox about facsimiles is that they are indeed by their very nature faithful representations, but they are also restorations and, my point, involve many creative decisions. What's at stake here is not a museum trying to generate an income that they in reality have no right to, but a
689:
thing. Or... I don't know. It is possible to do many different prints from the same woodblock, and since they were handmade, they would look different, all of them, more or less. It is not like just having one painting and one possible faithful reproduction. They came out differen.
801:
The white face is paint. Everything on a
Japanese woodcut print is put there. If the use plain paper and skip the white print plate, then it will be no white face. And if you put only a little, it will be hardly noticeable, like here probably. It is a special technic they use, the
1498:
It's instinct, not really knowledgeable on
American copyright law as I stress. Didn't know that about Japan copyright law, but at Commons it must be PD in both nation of origin and US. At the beginning of this year I uploaded to the English Knowledge (XXG) some Fair Use images of
1027:
Ukiyo-e was printed on a variety of paper qualities for different audiences and purposes, from the luxurious to the relatively inexpensive, but I don't think you could call any of it "cheap newspaper quality". They were generally hand-made mulberry paper, and the full-colour
998:
surviving examples of these prints) I mention above could have started life anywhere from red to green and in between. The Museum of Fine Arts in Boston has one of the largest and finest collection of these prints, but as you can readily see they generally haven't aged well:
711:
50:
806:. A nishiki-e print is created by carving a separate woodblock for every color, and using them in a stepwise fashion, made by hand. They put the paper on the plate and push, once for lines, once for colors, details, extra colors, and so on. It is not a painting, it is a
1616:
Presently, in the context of photographing 3-D objects, it's accepted that the photographer has rights. That she doesn't in 2-D strikes me as frankly perverse, but as I say it's not something I lose sleep about over museum images. Facsimile editions a different matter.
67:
the courtesans Ohisa and Okita and the singer Toyohina in a pyramidal formation. This pyramidal formation was an innovation of Utamaro's which was frequently copied by later ukiyo-e artists. Utamaro brought to the genre of figure prints a new ideal of feminine
279:
prints don't age well and that pale chestnut-maroon of the robes probably started life as something quite different. They were used as packing paper in Van Gogh's time! He tried to set up a business in Paris selling them, but it wasn't successful. Degas and
1057:
Yes, I admit to talking out of the box "newspaper quality", but it was nevertheless art for mass consumption was it not? And it was precisely that aspect that attracted Westerners such as Degas and Cassatt. That Adachi facsimile is beautiful.
1530:
Well, of course there's a market for these things, but the fact that there's money to be made isn't a consideration in US copyright law (is it in the UK/Europe?). I would be shocked if those editions were considered eligible for copyright.
1562:. That concerned photography. It's quite a stretch to move to cutting woodblocks, selecting inks and printing impressions as merely "slavish copying". I shall email LoC for their views and if I get a reply let you know on your Talk page.
1313:
Copyright issue interesting on reflection. These Adachi prints date from around 1950s it seems. Are they in copyright in US law. They can't be said to be 'faithful representations' can they? Or are they classed as mere derivative works?
1032:
prints in particular (that are synonymous with "ukiyo-e" in the West) had to be of higher quality to withstand the multiple impressions of the different colour woodblocks (up to twenty in some cases). Utamaro had the same publisher as
1852:, there are only two known copies from the original printing, and they both have the names of the thre beuaties to the left of the title in the top right corner. One of the copies is in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston—you can see it
1713:... right, answers on a postcard. The realistic, matter of fact approach to alll this is that imaging of PD work in the modern world should not attract fresh copyright. Give it anothee decade. I'll allow others the last word here.
1411:
Given that Adachi's selling point is that they reproduce these prints as exactly as possible—right down to how the individual hairs are carved and the mica dusting—I imagine they've foregone any claims of having crossed the
661:
I presume this is a response to my comment further up, not to it being purplish? Because I'm not quite convinced that hand-made paper tends towards purple most of the time, and most Ukiyo-es I've seen tend to age yellow.
1441:
I always make it clear that I'm not a lawyer, know nothing substantial about US copyright law and indeed copyright law in general, and I'm always prepared to defer to experts, whether real, television or for that matter
341:
Well, I thought that was probably true of the packing paper story, still a good story. That's right about degrading. The quality of surviving copies of these prints varies enormously. Excellent user page of yours -
1004:
is typical. What should be at stake here is the authenticity. Has the file been digitally processed and if so is the result authentic (or if not, at least meritorious on aesthetic grounds). In this case it's the
929:
p. 65). The first (I mean the same example 21.6410 at Boston MFA) is reproduced at p. 67 of Mathews & Shapiro, where the grey of the robes in the museum image is revealed as in fact a plum colour. Good luck.
1793:
Just a question (I don't hang around here much and don't know the ropes): by "wrong" colours, do you mean not the original colours, or not the colours the print has now after two centuries of fading?
1390:
841:), which provides a close-up of each subject; the pyramidal formation of the figures; and the use of a sparkling mica-dust background (kirazuri) that sets off the soft matte tones of the faces.
556:
Well done! I suspect Mary Cassatt probably didn't have this set in her collection (she had a few from Utamaro) but I'll keep it mind. I'll add to the Commons description when I have a moment.
166:
as well. Minor nitpicks, really. This is easily worth a support (blur is understandable, since the original object isn't even 40cm on its longest side yet this was scanned at 8k pixels). —
427:
is rather poorly represented among our Featured Pictures of East Asian art, weird enough, considering that representing feminine beauty (Bijin-ga) how significant part is of the famous
1954:
Promoted File:Kitagawa Utamaro - Toji san bijin (Three Beauties of the Present Day)From Bijin-ga (Pictures of Beautiful Women), published by Tsutaya Juzaburo - Google Art Project.jpg
1556:
which undoubtedly would cease to exit if their copyright weren't granted. Of course a loss, to say nothing of the loss of livelihood of its employees. The US case law in question is
1551:
No, you're right about money to be made. What I meant to suggest is that whereas no one really laments the fact that museums have been stiffed of their reproduction revenues (and
1127:
420:
120:
1853:
93:) artist. Utamaro is famous for his portraits of feminine beauties, his close-up portraits of beautiful women marked an epoch in the evolution of the Japanese print called
313:
had been used as packing material by FĂ©lix Bracquemond's printer, and Monet may have found some prints in Holland that were used as wrapping paper. The pigments and apper
1006:
1984:
1848:
I don't mean to throw a monkeywrench into the nomination, but if we are insisting on the "original" printing, this isn't it—according to Hideo Matsui, who runs the
1359:
636:
Yes it is. Depends on the quality of the print, paper and so no. Generally, they used hand-made paper; and those woodblocks were used to create lots of prints. .
317:
susceptible to degradation---compare an original to one of the Adachi reprints and see what a difference there is---you can see the clouds in the background of
1974:
1383:
for his fantastic restoration work might not be defendable in the United States, amazing as that seems. I recall I tried to nominate a restored version of
97:(pictures of beautiful women), that is depicting feminine beauty in the Japanese art history. Utamaro is one of the very best representant of this genre.
919:
Commons:File:Kitagawa Utamaro - Takashima Ohisa Using Two Mirrors to Observe Her Coiffure Night of the Asakusa Marketing Festival - MFA Boston 21.6410.jpg
513:
894:
Also, this triangular composition may have been innovative in Japanese art, but it had become a common compositional device in Italian art in the 1300s.
477:
One interjection: that's a 12th century print; there's quite a difference in appearance between 12th-century and a well-preserved 19th century print.
1009:
image via Google Art Ptoject and so far it hasn't been tinkered with. So I don't think there any issues regarding authenticity to worry about here.
17:
535:
1274:
I'm not familiar enough with the guidelines; all I'll say is that several of the other ukiyo-e FPs are reprints---the other Utamaro's an Adachi.
1504:
516:
incidentally if anyone's offering. Christie's don't keep their Zoomify images up for ever, so I would grab them quick if genuinely interested.
1979:
1558:
61:, considered by many to be the greatest of the Ukiyo-e artists, is famous for his clear, precise and elegant drawings. This copy shows: (
285:
922:
843:
This print is one of at least three known states (versions with some variation of detail) of this design and includes a title cartouche
1455:. They regard them as reprints of an original, which I think is wrong in fact. I shall email them for clarification and report back.
1877:
862:
779:
1776:: I think it's better to promote this one, and if the colours prove wrong, we can fix it when we have the proof, not before.
1718:
1661:
1622:
1567:
1517:
1460:
1369:
1357:
It may well be my Brit perspective getting in the way but I am dubious. I know nothing about US copyright law, but I do know
1319:
1304:
1063:
1014:
935:
686:
581:
561:
521:
393:
351:
293:
1813:
I'd be surprised if something faded lilac, but it could be something like fingers spreading the mica dust around over time.
681:
1849:
1512:
facsimiles. I really do doubt that the spirit of the "faithful representation" doctrine in the US can extend to these.
757:
Hmm. I'm not sure - the faces are normally very, very white in geisha prints, it seems odd they're slightly coloured.
1635:
Wow, I can't grasp that "perversity" at all. It sounds to me more like an underhanded way to rob the Public Domain.
1296:
268:
914:
272:
1656:
restoration of the original work by for example cutting woodblocks, taking plaster casts of sculptures and so on.
1126:, one of the most beautiful of Utamaro's production... and since we are so low on good pictures in the category
494:
It say dated about 1793, same year when Louis XVI of France was guillotined... It is probably like 221 year old?
1714:
1657:
1618:
1563:
1513:
1456:
1365:
1315:
1300:
1231:
1059:
1010:
931:
577:
557:
517:
389:
347:
343:
306:
289:
1413:
1173:
a modern Adachi reprint, to give an idea of how much the colours have degraded. Of course, that'll be true for
831:
409:- The other featured Utamaro is different, a single woman, but this print is using three women as a triangle ,
1077:
1709:
1122:
Looks like I started quite a debate with this poor picture. I really thougt that this one is going to be a
1885:
1861:
1798:
1640:
1598:
1536:
1483:
1426:
1342:
1279:
1199:
1182:
1085:
1042:
373:
326:
1034:
1934:
1693:
1398:
1261:
1169:
Oh, I'm not the right guy to ask about that sort of thing... This shouldn't affect this nomination, but
543:
212:
171:
969:
Yeah, and who did that Olympia-situation, if not Naughty-Coaty, before graciously joining the gang?
679:
I don't know Adam. It could be the paper is coloured, it fades downwards. These look like they have
1916:
1679:
1589:
images are substantially exact reproductions of public domain works, albeit in a different medium".
1243:
1156:
1135:
981:
871:
851:
815:
744:
695:
641:
499:
456:
436:
251:
189:
146:
246:
here. Also, this picture is used in many articles on all Wikis. (And it had enough pixels too...)
1508:
1385:
901:
78:
developing a new style. The composition is unusual, and it is correct, it is cut of like this.
1881:
1857:
1816:
1794:
1779:
1636:
1594:
1532:
1500:
1479:
1422:
1338:
1275:
1227:
1215:
1195:
1178:
1148:
1081:
1038:
999:
955:
888:
760:
665:
622:
480:
369:
322:
242:
111:
1930:
1689:
1417:
1394:
1257:
1219:
539:
208:
167:
128:
86:
1451:
However it's true that the Library of Congress does tag Adachi prints in the way you say -
949:
1235:
1170:
1299:. As for the reprint, that would be brilliant except I suspect it's still in copyright.
1912:
1839:
1675:
1584:
only makes me more confident that Adachi prints are uncopyrightable, particularly here:
1239:
1238:
as a re-nomination instead of the original, the print from museum scan, 200 years old?
1152:
1131:
977:
925:
and hung for many years on her walls, showing the effects of fading (Mathews, Shapiro,
867:
847:
811:
740:
691:
656:
637:
495:
432:
247:
230:
185:
142:
1968:
1957:
1223:
897:
413:
it is a specific composition and a significant work of Utamaro. This composition was
917:
by way of reference. To illustrate the problems confronted by a "restorer" this is
281:
162:- Needs categories on Commons (easily fixed). This might have EV in the article on
1474:
cut before 1964 are in the public domain in Japan any way one slices it (such as
1475:
1452:
368:
page that's now up for FAC. I forgot to redirect it to the mainspace article.
1835:
1337:
effects can't be reproduced by machine, such as in the fading blue skies).
1333:
all the woodblocks by hand, and do all the printing by hand, too (the faded
803:
207:- Perhaps not Utamaro's most famous work, but illustrative of the genre. —
733:
424:
163:
94:
75:
994:
896:
I would like to make some adjustments to the caption,before it's used.
838:
428:
415:
365:
276:
236:
107:
103:
90:
62:
58:
512:
Added. There's a nice Christie's set of deplorable images by Utamaro
1929:
The later print still has enough EV in that article. Thanks Curly. —
732:? They say something of the use of a sparkling mica-dust background (
1177:
original. They weren't created with long-term preservation in mind.
309:: That whole "packing material" meme is way exaggerated. Hokusai's
807:
71:
49:
860:
And Utamaro's prints look like this sometimes, se book cover
1416:. I'm definitely not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but
431:
Japanese prints. As for the print, old prints lok like this.
1674:
Coaty be the nice, brilliant, lovely guy we all appreciate.
1593:
With Adachi, there isn't even a "different medium" in play.
892:
wasn't quite right. Otherwise, it is a well-composed print.
685:
background. Maybe to emphasize the witness of the skin. The
952:
situation. I don't suppose anyone can actually look at it?
1903:. Looks like this discussion resulted in a new article...
1707:
Like name your top 10 favourite images of Michelangelo's
1128:
Knowledge (XXG):Featured pictures/Artwork/East Asian art
783:
James Tissot - Young Ladies Looking at Japanese Objects
421:
Knowledge (XXG):Featured pictures/Artwork/East Asian art
364:
AARGH! Don't read that! That was an early draft of the
121:
Knowledge (XXG):Featured pictures/Artwork/East Asian art
1076:
They were mass-produced, but "mass" is a relative term—
240:, videly copied later, and it is easy to compare with
35:
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.
1614:
copyrightable whereas today that cannot be maintained.
1580:
I'll be glad to read it. I have to say, though, that
284:
much influenced by them - more examples of Utamaro in
419:, and widely copied. And if you look at the category
810:. It all depends on how the actual print was made.
1688:Coat, do you do photography? Serious question. —
830:, left upper corner ? IT reads like this, from
460:An East Asian art FP - Old prints look like this
1360:Adobe Systems, Inc. v. Southern Software, Inc.
89:(1753 – 1806) was a Japanese woodblock print (
619:Is it just me, or is this slightly purplish?
388:Whoops, sorry. Still looks prety good to me.
8:
423:, there is no such picture there, actually
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured picture candidates
948:Mind you, I'm a little scared of another
923:This is the version owned by Mary Cassatt
228:- Rather a well known Utamaro print ...
114:and 45 other articles on different Wikis.
778:
736:) - and about different copies. This is
710:
455:
267:Note there's already a featured Utamaro
234:, here and it is a special composition
536:File:UTAMAKURA (POEM OF THE PILLOW).jpg
1985:Featured picture nominations/June 2014
1124:singularly uncontroversial nomination
7:
1904:
1559:Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.
1297:Ase o fuku onna (Woman wiping sweat)
970:
271:, a beautifully restored version of
715:At thumb size the faces look whiter
1975:Ended featured picture nominations
921:uploaded by me earlier this year.
24:
1878:Three Beauties of the Present Day
70:His drawings has influencer both
28:Three Beauties of the Present Day
1905:
971:
1449:industry with many antecedents.
1389:for deletion, but it was kept (
927:Mary Cassatt: The Color Prints
915:This is the MFA Boston version
687:Light skin in Japanese culture
1:
1850:Koishikawa Ukiyo-e Art Museum
1980:Featured picture nominations
1151:, what about the lilac hue?
824:Have you tried to click on
286:one of my Cassatt sandboxes
2001:
845:in the upper right corner.
117:FP category for this image
1256:Original, not reprint. —
566:08:21, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
548:04:28, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
526:19:14, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
298:19:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
256:14:10, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
217:12:51, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
194:12:06, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
176:12:05, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
151:11:31, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
1961:11:32, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
1939:03:57, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
1921:10:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
1892:06:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
1868:06:12, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
1844:07:43, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
1822:02:42, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
1805:22:04, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1785:21:53, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1723:15:24, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
1698:13:53, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
1684:18:22, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
1666:11:43, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
1647:02:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
1627:23:50, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
1605:22:22, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
1572:21:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
1543:20:15, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
1522:15:38, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
1490:11:29, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
1465:10:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
1433:02:09, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
1414:threshold of originality
1403:00:54, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
1374:23:32, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1349:20:35, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1324:16:21, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1309:16:16, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1286:16:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1266:16:07, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1248:16:02, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1206:15:35, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1189:15:27, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1161:14:40, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1140:14:37, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1092:21:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1068:16:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1049:14:19, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1019:09:51, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
986:11:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
961:08:56, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
940:13:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
906:05:52, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
876:02:58, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
856:01:13, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
832:The Toledo Museum of Art
820:02:58, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
766:00:16, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
749:17:04, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
700:16:44, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
671:16:28, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
646:15:28, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
628:15:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
586:03:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
504:15:40, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
486:15:28, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
441:10:57, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
398:15:51, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
380:14:28, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
356:14:17, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
333:13:52, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
1234:that we should use the
231:one of his finest works
1592:
1478:, purchased in 1938).
1078:According to this page
787:
716:
461:
79:
39:Voting period ends on
1585:
863:Utamaro revealed here
782:
714:
459:
53:
1715:Coat of Many Colours
1658:Coat of Many Colours
1619:Coat of Many Colours
1564:Coat of Many Colours
1514:Coat of Many Colours
1457:Coat of Many Colours
1366:Coat of Many Colours
1316:Coat of Many Colours
1301:Coat of Many Colours
1232:Coat of Many Colours
1060:Coat of Many Colours
1011:Coat of Many Colours
932:Coat of Many Colours
578:Coat of Many Colours
558:Coat of Many Colours
518:Coat of Many Colours
390:Coat of Many Colours
348:Coat of Many Colours
307:Coat of Many Colours
290:Coat of Many Colours
139:Support as nominator
1507:of William Blake's
1295:as Durova did with
1236:REPRINT showed here
887:I would agree with
834:, USA,: (citation)
416:invented by Utamaro
237:invented by Utamaro
1582:Bridgeman v. Corel
1509:The Book of Urizen
1453:this is an example
1386:A Trip to the Moon
788:
717:
462:
344:worth checking out
80:
57:– Date about 1793
1501:Charlotte Salomon
889:User:Adam Cuerden
112:Portrait painting
47:
1992:
1910:
1909:
1908:
1820:
1783:
1035:Tsutaya JĹ«zaburĹŤ
976:
975:
974:
959:
764:
669:
660:
626:
484:
129:Kitagawa Utamaro
87:Kitagawa Utamaro
38:
36:
2000:
1999:
1995:
1994:
1993:
1991:
1990:
1989:
1965:
1964:
1906:
1814:
1777:
1391:discussion here
972:
953:
785:(NOT NOMINATED)
758:
663:
654:
620:
478:
37:
34:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1998:
1996:
1988:
1987:
1982:
1977:
1967:
1966:
1950:
1948:
1947:
1946:
1945:
1944:
1943:
1942:
1941:
1924:
1923:
1895:
1894:
1880:, by the way.
1876:Oh, check out
1871:
1870:
1846:
1829:
1828:
1827:
1826:
1825:
1824:
1808:
1807:
1788:
1787:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1765:
1764:
1763:
1762:
1761:
1760:
1759:
1758:
1757:
1756:
1755:
1754:
1753:
1752:
1751:
1750:
1749:
1748:
1747:
1746:
1745:
1744:
1743:
1742:
1741:
1740:
1739:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1735:
1734:
1733:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1727:
1726:
1725:
1701:
1700:
1686:
1669:
1668:
1650:
1649:
1630:
1629:
1615:
1608:
1607:
1575:
1574:
1546:
1545:
1525:
1524:
1493:
1492:
1468:
1467:
1450:
1443:
1436:
1435:
1406:
1405:
1377:
1376:
1352:
1351:
1327:
1326:
1311:
1289:
1288:
1269:
1268:
1251:
1250:
1214:Do you think,
1209:
1208:
1191:
1164:
1163:
1143:
1142:
1119:
1118:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1095:
1094:
1071:
1070:
1052:
1051:
1022:
1021:
1001:Abalone Divers
989:
988:
964:
963:
943:
942:
909:
908:
895:
893:
879:
878:
858:
822:
777:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
752:
751:
709:
708:
707:
706:
705:
704:
703:
702:
674:
673:
649:
648:
631:
630:
613:
612:
611:
610:
609:
608:
607:
606:
605:
604:
603:
602:
601:
600:
599:
598:
597:
596:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
590:
589:
588:
569:
568:
551:
550:
529:
528:
507:
506:
489:
488:
454:
453:
452:
451:
450:
449:
448:
447:
446:
445:
444:
443:
401:
400:
383:
382:
359:
358:
336:
335:
319:The Great Wave
301:
300:
273:this LoC print
261:
260:
259:
258:
220:
219:
201:
200:
199:
198:
197:
196:
179:
178:
154:
153:
134:
132:
131:
126:
123:
118:
115:
101:
98:
84:
45:11:31:45 (UTC)
33:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1997:
1986:
1983:
1981:
1978:
1976:
1973:
1972:
1970:
1963:
1962:
1959:
1955:
1951:
1940:
1936:
1932:
1928:
1927:
1926:
1925:
1922:
1918:
1914:
1902:
1899:
1898:
1897:
1896:
1893:
1889:
1888:
1883:
1879:
1875:
1874:
1873:
1872:
1869:
1865:
1864:
1859:
1855:
1851:
1847:
1845:
1841:
1837:
1834:
1831:
1830:
1823:
1819:
1818:
1812:
1811:
1810:
1809:
1806:
1802:
1801:
1796:
1792:
1791:
1790:
1789:
1786:
1782:
1781:
1775:
1772:
1771:
1724:
1720:
1716:
1712:
1711:
1705:
1704:
1703:
1702:
1699:
1695:
1691:
1687:
1685:
1681:
1677:
1673:
1672:
1671:
1670:
1667:
1663:
1659:
1654:
1653:
1652:
1651:
1648:
1644:
1643:
1638:
1634:
1633:
1632:
1631:
1628:
1624:
1620:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1609:
1606:
1602:
1601:
1596:
1591:
1590:
1583:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1560:
1554:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1544:
1540:
1539:
1534:
1529:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1523:
1519:
1515:
1510:
1506:
1502:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1491:
1487:
1486:
1481:
1477:
1472:
1471:
1470:
1469:
1466:
1462:
1458:
1454:
1448:
1440:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1434:
1430:
1429:
1424:
1419:
1418:this document
1415:
1410:
1409:
1408:
1407:
1404:
1400:
1396:
1392:
1388:
1387:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1375:
1371:
1367:
1362:
1361:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1353:
1350:
1346:
1345:
1340:
1336:
1331:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1312:
1310:
1306:
1302:
1298:
1293:
1292:
1291:
1290:
1287:
1283:
1282:
1277:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1254:
1253:
1252:
1249:
1245:
1241:
1237:
1233:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1217:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1207:
1203:
1202:
1197:
1192:
1190:
1186:
1185:
1180:
1176:
1172:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1162:
1158:
1154:
1150:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1141:
1137:
1133:
1129:
1125:
1121:
1120:
1093:
1089:
1088:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1050:
1046:
1045:
1040:
1036:
1031:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1020:
1016:
1012:
1008:
1003:
1002:
996:
993:
992:
991:
990:
987:
983:
979:
968:
967:
966:
965:
962:
958:
957:
951:
947:
946:
945:
944:
941:
937:
933:
928:
924:
920:
916:
913:
912:
911:
910:
907:
903:
899:
890:
886:
883:
882:
881:
880:
877:
873:
869:
865:
864:
859:
857:
853:
849:
846:
844:
840:
833:
829:
828:
827:show details?
823:
821:
817:
813:
809:
805:
800:
799:
798:
797:
796:
795:
794:
793:
792:
791:
790:
789:
786:
781:
767:
763:
762:
756:
755:
754:
753:
750:
746:
742:
738:
735:
731:
730:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
719:
718:
713:
701:
697:
693:
688:
684:
683:
678:
677:
676:
675:
672:
668:
667:
658:
653:
652:
651:
650:
647:
643:
639:
635:
634:
633:
632:
629:
625:
624:
618:
615:
614:
587:
583:
579:
575:
574:
573:
572:
571:
570:
567:
563:
559:
555:
554:
553:
552:
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
532:
531:
530:
527:
523:
519:
515:
511:
510:
509:
508:
505:
501:
497:
493:
492:
491:
490:
487:
483:
482:
476:
475:
474:
473:
472:
471:
470:
469:
468:
467:
466:
465:
464:
463:
458:
442:
438:
434:
430:
426:
422:
418:
417:
412:
408:
405:
404:
403:
402:
399:
395:
391:
387:
386:
385:
384:
381:
377:
376:
371:
367:
363:
362:
361:
360:
357:
353:
349:
345:
340:
339:
338:
337:
334:
330:
329:
324:
320:
316:
312:
308:
305:
304:
303:
302:
299:
295:
291:
287:
283:
278:
274:
270:
266:
263:
262:
257:
253:
249:
245:
244:
239:
238:
233:
232:
227:
224:
223:
222:
221:
218:
214:
210:
206:
203:
202:
195:
191:
187:
183:
182:
181:
180:
177:
173:
169:
165:
161:
158:
157:
156:
155:
152:
148:
144:
140:
137:
136:
135:
130:
127:
124:
122:
119:
116:
113:
109:
105:
102:
99:
96:
92:
88:
85:
82:
81:
77:
73:
69:
64:
60:
56:
52:
48:
46:
42:
29:
26:
19:
1953:
1952:
1949:
1900:
1886:
1882:Curly Turkey
1862:
1858:Curly Turkey
1832:
1817:Adam Cuerden
1815:
1799:
1795:Curly Turkey
1780:Adam Cuerden
1778:
1773:
1708:
1641:
1637:Curly Turkey
1599:
1595:Curly Turkey
1587:
1586:
1581:
1557:
1552:
1537:
1533:Curly Turkey
1484:
1480:Curly Turkey
1446:
1427:
1423:Curly Turkey
1384:
1358:
1343:
1339:Curly Turkey
1334:
1280:
1276:Curly Turkey
1228:Adam Cuerden
1216:Curly Turkey
1200:
1196:Curly Turkey
1183:
1179:Curly Turkey
1174:
1149:Curly Turkey
1123:
1086:
1082:Curly Turkey
1043:
1039:Curly Turkey
1029:
1007:museum image
1000:
956:Adam Cuerden
954:
926:
884:
861:
842:
835:
825:
784:
761:Adam Cuerden
759:
737:
727:
680:
666:Adam Cuerden
664:
623:Adam Cuerden
621:
616:
534:Uploaded as
481:Adam Cuerden
479:
414:
410:
406:
374:
370:Curly Turkey
327:
323:Curly Turkey
318:
314:
310:
282:Mary Cassatt
264:
241:
235:
229:
225:
204:
159:
138:
133:
66:
54:
44:
40:
32:
27:
1931:Crisco 1492
1690:Crisco 1492
1505:a facsimile
1442:wikipedian.
1395:Crisco 1492
1258:Crisco 1492
1220:Crisco 1492
540:Crisco 1492
243:other works
209:Crisco 1492
168:Crisco 1492
41:9 Jul 2014
1969:Categories
1913:Hafspajen
1676:Hafspajen
1447:bona fide
1240:Hafspajen
1153:Hafspajen
1132:Hafspajen
1030:nishiki-e
978:Hafspajen
868:Hafspajen
848:Hafspajen
812:Hafspajen
804:Nishiki-e
741:Hafspajen
729:this help
692:Hafspajen
682:a colored
657:Hafspajen
638:Hafspajen
496:Hafspajen
433:Hafspajen
248:Hafspajen
186:Hafspajen
184:OK, fix.
143:Hafspajen
1958:Armbrust
1887:¡gobble!
1863:¡gobble!
1800:¡gobble!
1642:¡gobble!
1600:¡gobble!
1553:American
1538:¡gobble!
1485:¡gobble!
1428:¡gobble!
1344:¡gobble!
1281:¡gobble!
1224:Amandajm
1201:¡gobble!
1194:prints.
1184:¡gobble!
1087:¡gobble!
1044:¡gobble!
1033:Sharaku—
898:Amandajm
734:kirazuri
425:Bijin-ga
375:¡gobble!
328:¡gobble!
164:Bijin-ga
100:Articles
95:bijin-ga
76:Van Gogh
63:citation
55:Original
1901:Comment
1833:Support
1774:Support
1335:bokashi
995:Ukiyo-e
950:Olympia
885:Comment
839:okubi-e
617:Comment
429:Ukiyo-e
407:Comment
366:ukiyo-e
277:Ukiyo-e
265:Support
226:Comment
205:Support
160:Comment
125:Creator
108:Ukiyo-e
104:Utamaro
91:ukiyo-e
68:beauty.
59:Utamaro
1171:here's
576:Done.
83:Reason
1710:Pieta
1393:). —
1130:...
808:print
726:Does
311:Manga
72:Monet
16:<
1935:talk
1917:talk
1854:here
1840:talk
1836:Yann
1719:talk
1694:talk
1680:talk
1662:talk
1623:talk
1568:talk
1518:talk
1476:this
1461:talk
1399:talk
1370:talk
1320:talk
1305:talk
1262:talk
1244:talk
1157:talk
1136:talk
1064:talk
1015:talk
982:talk
936:talk
902:talk
872:talk
852:talk
816:talk
745:talk
696:talk
642:talk
582:talk
562:talk
544:talk
538:. —
522:talk
514:here
500:talk
437:talk
394:talk
352:talk
294:talk
269:here
252:talk
213:talk
190:talk
172:talk
147:talk
74:and
1175:any
866:.
739:...
411:and
315:are
43:at
1971::
1956:--
1937:)
1919:)
1911:.
1890:âšź
1866:âšź
1856:.
1842:)
1803:âšź
1721:)
1696:)
1682:)
1664:)
1645:âšź
1625:)
1603:âšź
1570:)
1541:âšź
1520:)
1488:âšź
1463:)
1431:âšź
1401:)
1372:)
1347:âšź
1322:)
1307:)
1284:âšź
1264:)
1246:)
1230:,
1226:,
1222:,
1218:,
1204:âšź
1187:âšź
1159:)
1138:)
1090:âšź
1066:)
1047:âšź
1017:)
984:)
938:)
904:)
874:)
854:)
818:)
747:)
698:)
644:)
584:)
564:)
546:)
524:)
502:)
439:)
396:)
378:âšź
354:)
346:.
331:âšź
321:!
296:)
288:.
275:.
254:)
215:)
192:)
174:)
149:)
141:–
110:,
106:,
65:)
1933:(
1915:(
1884:âšž
1860:âšž
1838:(
1797:âšž
1717:(
1692:(
1678:(
1660:(
1639:âšž
1621:(
1597:âšž
1566:(
1535:âšž
1516:(
1482:âšž
1459:(
1425:âšž
1397:(
1368:(
1341:âšž
1318:(
1303:(
1278:âšž
1260:(
1242:(
1198:âšž
1181:âšž
1155:(
1134:(
1084:âšž
1062:(
1041:âšž
1013:(
980:(
934:(
900:(
870:(
850:(
814:(
743:(
694:(
659::
655:@
640:(
580:(
560:(
542:(
520:(
498:(
435:(
392:(
372:âšž
350:(
325:âšž
292:(
250:(
211:(
188:(
170:(
145:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
