First of all, I am writing, again. I took a break because from February to Thanksgiving, I was driving everywhere doing shows or in my studio working or resting for my next trip.
Secondly, I am jealous of photographers because their work is an easy sell and you get decent prices. Whereas, clay is a hard sell, the prices are way less than they should be based on the time it takes to make a decent pot.
However, why do so many photographers shoot images that could only be called "what I did on my summer vacation?" OK! I get it. That stuff sells. However, where are the photos that tell a story? Where are the photojournalists that are recording history? Where are the impactfull photographs?
There was a woman a few booths down from me a couple of years ago that went into areas where women were captured and held as slave labor and shot them. They were extremely powerful.
Emerson goes to places and records other people's culture and way of life. Look at Nels images. They captures life in an out of the box view of America. Or, Jim Parker, who explores the textures and captures the elegance of old ordinary objects of Americana. Most of the rest of you bore me with your cliches.
Rebuttle?
Replies
I dunno, BB. There's plenty of sameness in all the mediums as artists think of the sale rather than the art. Maybe not so in jewelry. But look at clay (a.k.a. pottery) sometime, as I'm sure you have plenty of times. Same ol' round platters with nice glazes or designs on them, and a bunch of functional wares like mugs and bowls and such. I don't mean we shouldn't be seeing those things, it just gets old.
I was sandwiched between a photog and a potter in Winter Park Sidewalk last year. SHEESH! They both killed it with all that same ol' stuff. The potter showed me her jury-in work and NONE OF IT SOLD. That doesn't mean it wouldn't have if she hadn't covered her booth with all the butter dishes and stuff. But she sold $39 to $199 all weekend long to the tune of six figures.
The photog sold so many prints of the cute squirrel picture it amazed me. Again, it wasn't one of his jury-in images at all. I didn't talk with him as much as the potter, but he rolled in the dough much the same as she.
I'm just not doing assembly line stuff like that. I'm keeping it focused on the art, not the product. Not where original work is concerned. I'm interested in paying my way, certainly. But our work sells and wins plenty awards. We had our best ever year in 2014.
Larry B., I'm a little slow this week to recognize your tongue-in-cheek response. Here we go again, it's all photography's fault. Well, I'm adding clay to the list. It's also those damn potters! WOOHOO!
I agree with you Mark, for the most part. I don't think the work has to be conceptual to be fresh. How many flowers over the archway in Tuscany do we have to see? Or reflections of mountains off still waters? At one time it was hot air balloons. Btw, Connie's husband Norm is a good example of someone who did something different and sold well. It can be done. That's all I'm saying. I'm not a fan of printing on canvas or metal. I've heard photographers complain about these things, also.
When did Steve McCurry try Ann Arbor? Hey, I did the Original show twice and I'm not even interested in going back there myself. The first year, 2007, was great; the second, 2008, terrible. Blame the economy for that? Maybe. Probably. But costs are too high and they don't allow repros. Awards aren't even very good, and both years we were there awards mostly went to fine craft stuff such as pottery and glass. Plus it was hot as hell the second year and poorly attended in our section (under the big tents near the tower.) One patron asked us why we weren't in the better show down on South University. I had great underground parking that cost me $100 adjacent to the skywalk in the State Street show, too. Could of had free parking, but I travel with dogs.
So maybe Mr. McCurry would have done better at a different event or at the same event in another year? Maybe this isn't the reason he didn't return, but why do people think that if it didn't happen for them at the big cheese venue or at this particular time, it ain't gonna happen here ever, or elsewhere anytime? Maybe the demographics attending Ann Arbor don't want McCurry's brand of photojournalism? Maybe he would have sold out next time when the stars were aligning better or the person who didn't even see him last year showed up this year?
Good thing Mr. McCurry had something to fall back on, like National Geographic and other assignment opportunities. I don't even seek commissions since I don't want to do what someone else asks me to do very often. I'll make an original frame sometimes for one of our limited editions, but I don't do it often. There's too much I haven't yet done and look forward to doing. Too much new ground to break.
Jay Canterbury's work continues to grow and get better still. I know. I see it every season and discuss it with him. Jay just had a solo exhibition in Butler Institute of Art last year...WOOHOO!
It's really hard to discuss photography with artists in other mediums, many think it's a matter of pushing a button and having a lab print it out. I do get that. What I wish is that shows would have a different method of jurying, so that the good work is selected. I suppose that goes for most work out there.
There are different venues for different products, (if we can call an art form a product). What you suggest, inspiring work is what the galleries show and sell. More conceptual. Art fair patrons are generally not as savvy, and or don't care about conceptual or thought provoking work. They tend to be decorators, and believe me, I wish it were not so.
Yes, that's why the best shows, which tend to be urban dwellers with higher demographics, can pull in those art buyers and not the decorators. And as Jim points out are juried much better. But, you have to understand that what we do is also a business, and all of us are doing the best we can to make a living. I will have different bodies of work, but know better what will sell in fairs. That's also why I have some galleries and do some high end indoor art shows, to gather the other end of the spectrum.
What I think is at least important, is that you maintain a high degree of professionalism in your work, with quality and presentation. On top of that, keep your editions reasonable, and that is not the art show standards, for sure, editions less than 250, is hardly an edition.
The pricing structure of some photographers makes no sense, and relies upon volume sales, and impulse buyers. And please canvas prints are not fine art. The new twist is on aluminum. But of course, it's easy to produce, and sell cheap. There are some shows that do not allow that, and they should be commended on that.
Lisa Kristine, is whom you are referring too, can do these few shows to promote her name, and has a following. We all have different strategy's, and I hear lots of complaints from artists about one thing or another. Many people don't even participate in these forums, due to rude comments, and lots of grumbling.
What we need to do is educate people to better standards, including getting the shows to better vent the show. After jury selection, I believe websites should be visited to determine the level of professionalism exhibited by the artists, and to see where they produce the work.
This would weed out buy sell, or cheaply manufactured goods, including photography. Gallery shows jury in this matter. You can get a much better read on an artists integrity by visiting a website than a few submitted images. An artist should be able to present him or herself with an online presence that gives customers as well as juries an opinion of that artists work. I see work at shows that does not belong there, and presented poorly, when others that applied do not get accepted.
That why I do Lego minifigures and vintage Fisher Price Little People... Oh am I'm getting into Playmobil too... I stands out from the rest the crowd.
Although, I do stunning landscapes too, those don't sell well in my booth. The toys do 98% of my sales...
I was going to write a response to Barry’s provocation, but after reading Robert’s response, I think it unnecessary.
Well done, Robert! I agree with Larry: definitely the post of the month/year.
Once upon a time I did some visually interesting work that had loads of meaning, full of metaphysical content, drawing upon the Symbolist movement from the end of the 19th Century through the early 20th Century. The work was on handmade papers and beautifully textured sheets of watercolor paper. I was working with Van Dyke Brown prints, Cyanotypes, gum bichromates, and traditional B&W silver gelatin fiber-based prints. I had landscapes dark and moody and full of life, I had figurative landscapes that looked like a nude goddess had just stepped into an Arcadian wilderness. They sold a few and I struggled to break even. It was damned frustrating. I did a few shows and sold a bunch to art school faculty members, other times I sold almost as many to other artists as I did to the public, which wasn't high numbers.
I went on vacation to New Orleans one year. Holy crap, you could blindfold yourself while strapping a camera to your head and still get some decent images. I decided to go for the gusto and do as many cliches of doors and windows as I could knowing they were cliches. I only had 2 1/2 days to explore the French Quarter, but I was up at the butt crack of dawn through sundown shooting. Now it might need to be pointed out these weren't "vacation shots" as I was looking for specific types of images, and not stop & get out of the car shots. I still used the same way I shot with film so I came away with almost 400 shots instead of several thousand, which were winnowed down to 16, and then after a few shows down to 12. Those comprise the bulk of my sales. It annoys me when I think about it as those were conscious spoofs if you will, but they were composed with a graphic design sensibility in spite of myself. Since then I've continually added more of that type, with work from all over. It's about texture, lighting, design, and yes emotion. In the end, it's emotion that sells the piece. I've seen crappy photographs from neighbors sell like crazy that were the sloppiest piece of crap I've ever seen. But they had emotional content that appealed to certain buyers.
My early work was high level, and appealed to those with the education to understand it. It was the tip of the pyramid and sales up there are far and few between. Yeah, it's nice to get drawn into scintillating conversations with potential customers that sound like you're in the middle of a grad school colloquium, but most of those are fruitless conversations as far as making a sale and making a profit. I had some very strong and powerful work, once causing an older lady to look at the work and stumble backwards when she realized what it was. Another time a piece had such emotional impact that a woman began crying in my booth when a work that included poetry was relevant to a failing relationship she was in. Neither piece ever sold.
Nope, the pieces with high concept are nice to look at but they don't move in sufficient volume or at high enough price point to enable a career creating and selling art. The public wants photography to be simple in structure and composed well enough that they know they couldn't do it. The mantra is that we must have a cohesive body of work or we confuse the public, and we certainly won't get past the judges. I've seen enough Joel Meyerowitz canoes at the end of a dock, and certainly enough Antelope Canyon shots. But those are the things that people want to buy, and if that stock image isn't in your inventory, then you've lost more bread and butter money.
End of story here and interpret it how you may. One time I arranged the work in the booth by style and theme. One section was Xerographic transfers, or if you prefer, photos that have had the living snot beaten out of them. A customer came through and spent a fair amount of time looking at everything on the walls. As they finished, they pointed to the transfer images, and asked who the artist was that did those. I said they were mine, as were the others. He looked at those, looked at another group, and looked back again, and asked, "No shit?"
I vote for Robert's response to be the post of the month/year.
Well said.
Larry Berman
I enjoy your writing style as well.
And there you have it.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next