"Yo, Is that u Leroy"

this would be one of my originals i would like to expand into a Lithograph print.. thing is, i'm not certain how this is accomplished; and poor boys rarely have the opportunity to apprentice under an established master..

to quote my role model,

"All artists are vain, they long to be recognised and to leave something to posterity. They want to be loved, and at the same time they want to be free. But nobody is free." Francis Bacon

Lithograph..is

A planographic process of printing from a flat stone or grained metal plate based upon the repellent force between grease and water. Developed in the early eighteenth century by Aloys Senefelder, lithography incorporates a method of drawing with either a grease crayon or a liquid tusche onto an aluminum plate or lithographic stone. The non-image areas are then desensitized to the acceptance of grease by applying a gum arabic solution. This printing surface is then dampened and an inked roller is passed over the image. The water areas repel the greasy ink as the image areas accept ink. The inked image is then transferred to paper as it is passed through a press.

i found this on the internet..which help'd put some focus onwhat i'm wanting to do..

"BACON'Another example I often use is Francis Bacon. Now, Francis had no interest in prints whatsoever. But all over the place you'll see prints by Bacon that are called lithographs and etchings and screenprints. But there's no original interest in the prints on his part - just an interest in signing them, as it helped to finance things a bit.'...In the 60s, the heyday of Pop Art, debate centred on the legitimacy of the silkscreen (just as today it focuses on the inkjet). [HAHA!-me]'The thing about the Pop Artists', says Cristea, 'is that they were investigating new methods. They wanted to introduce photographic elements and collage and throw them all into a print. The best way to do all this was the screenprint, so they adopted it as a fine art medium.

WARHOL'Warhol is a fascinating case, because virtually everything he ever did was a screenprint [...] there were relatively few pictures where Warhol had actually dipped his brush in the pot and slapped the brush on the canvas, because they're silkscreens on canvas.' Now that confuses the hell out of people. When Warhol did the painting he was using exactly the same method as he would for a print (he started with a photograph, made a photo-stencil and then he started squeegee-ing on the colour); except he did it only once.'So the difference between a painting and a print in Warhol's case is that they call the paintings "paintings" because there's only one of them. Strictly speaking they should call them "unique silkscreens on canvas".[...]"

the thing that no one mentions is just how expensive is this process for the artist..

well, i did find a art forum that seems to look useful to this inquiry..

gonna need to read through some of this before i can strongly recommend.. again another peice of my work