(Gary, I tell ya, just for fun one day, have a stab at designing a print without using the gradation tool in your computer program. I'm half-serious ... see how well the images stand up when only the 'bare' design is visible ...)

They do not 'stand up' particularly well sometimes without the addition of something to give them atmosphere or depth. For some designs,more line may be appropriate. For some landscapes however, and particularly those without many dramatic elements inherent in them, such as Hilo Bay, the 'atmosphere' can be the highlight of the scene. In creating this atmosphere, gradations can be indispensable.

I am near certain it was the effects of these gradations that caught your eye and attracted you to this print, not particularly the 'design' of it. Am I wrong?

I am near certain it was the effects of these gradations that caught your eye and attracted you to this print, not particularly the 'design' of it.

Of course ... and I wasn't 'complaining' about it, or I wouldn't have selected this one! Just that as I did the block breakdown I was a bit struck by the fact that there are essentially no areas here without gradations, if you except the red cartouche (and I guess the tree fronds).

I've written before about feeling uncomfortable with the style of woodblock printmaking that gets too far away from clean black outlines and flat colour; the stuff can start to look like silkscreen work. That's obviously not the case here though ... Anyway, I was just thinking out loud ...

Alas...... the red cartouche has no need of gradation. Should we do it anyway? : )

I believe you could combine 'Area A' on your 'vegetation' block, with 'Area D' on your 'mountainside' block and print them together. Area A would simply be on the darker side of your gradation.

The 'vegetation' greens could overlay each other, printing the lightest first, then mixing your pigment so that it achieves the right combination with the green under it, until you get to your darkest and last overprinting. That should eliminate any chance of the blocks leaving gaps between them also.

I believe you could combine 'Area A' on your 'vegetation' block, with 'Area D' on your 'mountainside' block and print them together.

Yes, that's what I mentioned at the end of my original post ... those two can run together for sure ...

The 'vegetation' greens could overlay each other, printing the lightest first, then mixing your pigment so that it achieves the right combination with the green under it

That too, is in the post ... Area 'B' will run under the entire vegetation area, so there will be no chance at all of gaps between the area.

The one that's still giving me pause is how to avoid gaps along the skyline. I can probably over/under lap along the sky-mountain border, but there is no way I can do that where the clouds meet the sky. I'm thinking that I might leave the smallest hair-line of white along the top edge of that cloud at the far left. That would just look like a bit of 'halo' effect, and would be far better than an overlap ...

I'm not sure I am following you exactly here. The area of the clouds can be carved out of the sky block leaving a void there. The block for the cloud gradation then, white at right and blue at left would then only 'overlap' where there is more pigment at the darker side of the gradation, and if there is overlap there, it shouldn't matter. As we are at the lower and therefore lighter side of the sky bokashi, we shouldn't run much risk of any visible overlap, will we?

I also assume that the clouds will actually be darker than in the digital print as you will not be working off a white background, but something closer to a light beige, or however you would characterize the actual color of the sized paper. I do not think you intend to print that _white_, do you?

That area - the sky to the left of the mountain - is very difficult, because it goes 'both ways'. At the extreme left, the cloud block is printing darker than the sky, but just a couple of inches to the right, the sky is darker than the cloud. There is no way to overlap them, and they are going to have to butt-up exactly.

And the same thing happens in the smaller cloud shapes behind the highest point of the mountain. That's one of the first places Numabe-san homed in on when I showed him this one.

As for the point about 'white', the cloud white will of course be the natural paper colour, and will thus match the margins of the print, unlike your digital sample. But it will look somewhat 'whiter' to the eye than the border area, because it is surrounded by darker printings ...

The 'smaller cloud shapes behind the highest point of the mountain' are not clouds at all, these are snow-capped peaks. If you look at the photo you found on the internet you will see them without snow I think, but the same peaks. One of the interesting things to me about this scene is the palms in the foreground with snow-capped peaks in the distance. An interesting quirk of nature in Hawaii. I am reminded of Toshi Yoshida's print of snow-capped Kilimanjaro in the distance with the African plains in the foreground. So certainly not the first time this has been done, but I don't know of too many places in the world where you can see that juxtaposition in one view.

Peaks! I didn't 'get that' at all; I wonder what other people saw there ... Jacques? Julio?

Well, whatever they are, I'm still faced with the same technical problems ...

Not offering any artistic suggestions here or anything like that, just simple observations...it looks to me like a giant cloud wave engulfing the mountain...because of the blue in the 'peaks' and because of the gradual slope of the upper mountain area matching the slope of the cloud wave and the snow peaks it first looks to me like clouds in the background...if it had less blue in there or if the breaks between green moutain and snow-peaks was more pronounced or if the peaks were sharper in nature then I think the 'peaks' would stand out more as snow-covered peaks...

I completely agree with you guys (Dave and Julio) that the unidentified flying objects on top of the Hilo Bay mountains print definitely look like _clouds_ to me, and not like snow-capped mountain tops, as you (Gary) apparently intended.

At the same time I have to say that -as far as I'm concerned- this issue doesn't in any way affect my appreciation of this beautiful image!

.. and of your technical problems, Dave, of course...

Wouldn't be the first time snow-capped peaks have been mistaken for clouds. As it's way off in the distance, I'll forgive you guys......... this time! :)