A lithograph is not a poster or just any form of art reproduction.
Its production is subject to very strict technical and artistic standards.
And yet, a great many perfectly ordinary reproductions are elevated to the status of lithographs without possessing any of the required qualities.

Reproductions produced and sold at low prices, with no real technical or artistic value, printed using offset or digital processes ;
most often from a simple photographic file and bearing nothing more than the name “lithograph.”

A powerful marketing term, deliberately misused to mislead unsuspecting buyers.

Although offset printing is historically derived from the chemical principles of lithography, it is an automated and sometimes industrial printing process,
adapted to the growing demands for cost efficiency and profitability.

A process far removed from the requirements of traditional lithography.

MISUSE OF THE TERM "LITHOGRAPHY" AS PART OF A COMPANY NAME

Some companies seeking to associate this prestigious technique with their production without ever actually using it,
do not hesitate to “invite” it into their commercial name.

THE CASE OF EDWARD MUNCH'S LITHOGRAPHS
Deliberate unfair competition.

In 2017, for the first time anywhere in the world since their original versions of 1895,
we reissued Edvard Munch’s “The Scream” and “Madonna” as color and black-and-white lithographs.

The entire reissue was produced entirely by hand using the traditional lithographic process.
A painstaking work of craftsmanship produced in a limited number of copies with an inevitably high production cost.

Under the misleading designation of “lithograph,” unscrupulous gallery owners and publishers have not hesitated
to reproduce certain works from our catalogue using offset or digital printing including these two major works by Edvard Munch.

A high-volume production run, offered at a particularly attractive price ranging from €119 to under €250 per unit.

A retail price that is, of course, impossible for a publisher of traditional handcrafted lithographs to sustain.

The deliberate omission of the actual printing processes used (offset or digigraphic printing)
constitutes an obvious failure to provide consumers with transparent information. 
This erroneous designation distorts the market and causes direct harm to professionals who, like us, adhere to rigorous technical terminology.

To prevent any confusion, French Decree No. 81-255 of March 3, 1981, known as the Marcus Decree,
establishes rules governing the prevention and suppression of fraud in transactions involving works of art and collectors’ items. 
It requires the use of precise technical terminology in the designation of such works.
A terminology that is sometimes respected, but too often disregarded.