OK, I know this is *the* can of worms in printmaking, but I would like to chuck my two pennyworth in before I get savaged *grin*. I have just had a 'print' recommended to me which I would not regard as such, because it was output solely by a printer from a computer. My personal definition of a print means a hands-on process, from creating the image to presenting the finished work. I have no problem with graphics software being used to help in creating an image, but once it is established it ought to be worked through by hand. A graphic printed with 'archival' inks on 'fine art' paper from an Espon ( deliberate misspelling ) Photowhatever does not qualify. The image is not the end product, but the start, as we all know that it can change and mutate through the processes of transferring, cutting/etching/whatever one does, and printing- all by hand.