And I was excited to see from the paper work that this was an originals only show, meaning (in my hopeful mind at least) that the average price point would be higher. I get here and find that there are print bins left and right- t-shirts even! So what do I do? Do I slide a few print bins in and try to make some money or do I follow the rules?
At the artist oasis I run into Jerry Dale McFadden, the show director, and I boldly go where I've never gone before and I just ask him- is that a rule that is being phased out and can I put out some print bins? "Oh no" he says, "We're trying to have a certain kind of show here, why? Have you seen prints?" Ummm, yeah. "Oh, well I better go police the area and play show director. Thanks for mentioning it." That was 4 hours ago and print bins are still out... So, you know what I'm gonna do? Tomorrow I'm dragging out my bins and seeing what I can do with them. This is ridiculous and yes, I'm a bit bitchy because I'm not selling but still! Either enforce a rule or get rid of it.
You need to be a member of Art Fair Insiders to add comments!
"Warren Townsend said-
I look at it this way, the painter did not make the reproduction they hired some company that does that kind of work. So is this any different than buy/sell? "
Yes it is different. Painters can and often do make their own reproductions. Sure there's some out there that outsource, but lots don't too.
Really, don't know what you are bitchin' about Warren.
The market will support what people feel is a fair price to pay for a piece of art. I take it you produce original works of art for big bucks. I produce original art for big bucks.
Are you mad because there's other mediums out there that can sell reproductions at lower price points to individuals who really can't afford anything more than $50-$100?
The market will not support, let's say, photographers destroying their negatives after one printing and selling as a true original for lets say $2500k. The concept has been tried, but not embraced. Has been tried by a few but I don't know of a single reknowned photographer that has a successful business model built on it. Nobody on the circuit does it. Ansel Adams didn't even do it. So why continue to bash photographers because of the way they produce their images to display at art shows? Not even the largest photographic works command the price that original sculptures, etc. do.
To say good photographers workflow consists of little more than pushing a button is easy, smug, convenient, and a big misconception.
I really have no opinion on photograghers and painters making reproductions and I do buy the notecards. As a jeweler, I am just jealous. I can make multiple pieces that look the same but it takes me the same time and cost to handweave the beads or work the metal whether I create the same design or a different one. Then again, my originials don't retail for $1500. Each art form has its own pros and cons.
Many sculptors do use foundry services to produce their sculptures and they are in many fine art shows...hard to know where to draw the line. Some artists do their own giclee printing, some don't... This is a whole different topic but interesting to debate.
Warren Townsend said:
See Larry, (sorry if I sound bitchy but been a rough last two weeks) you say it is okay for painters but did not mention the rest of us artist, you know the sculptors, glass folks or the clay workers. I look at it this way, the painter did not make the reproduction they hired some company that does that kind of work. So is this any different than buy/sell? So if us sculptures hire one of these reproduction companies out of China (I get emails from them all of the time saying let us reproduce your art) then since I also need to support the price of my sculptures it is okay to sell these reproductions at the art fairs?
As far as photographers being a medium of multiple originals, I guess that is like saying photographers do not make "a" original piece of art.
Why do I think it's OK for painters to sell reproductions? Because there are many shows that can't support the price of an original painting. That has nothing to do with photography and no matter what other mediums think, photography isn't a medium of reproductions, it's a medium of multiple originals.
Did not apply to Pittsburgh this year because we are in the middle of downsizing our $$$ and are moving to a much smaller studio after 8 years collecting STUFF.... ... Lots of damaged frames, canvasses and paint we don't use, etc. We start back up travelling to Buffalo NY 2nd week in June. Next year I think I will apply to Pittsburgh now that they have cut it back to 2 weeks. Have a good summer. Need some new images but no "dinero" right now.
Sorry Larry...didn't mean to step on your foot... You have rightly corrected my description. I was thinking of multiple images and not really very clear.... Forgiveness please... And I do know you have supported artists' right to sell giclees. As I said, personally I would rather never sell a reproduction but that is just because I love to paint so much and don't feel the giclees do justice for my type of work.
Hope you will accept my most humble apologies.... I stand corrected.
Hi Elaine,
I've supported the rights of artists to sell reproductions for 30 years so I agree with you. Last year the director of the Bethesda Row show called me and asked what I thought about reproductions and I explained that I'm totally for artists to be able to earn a living and shows should be juried on quality of the work and not marketing.
I do want to point out your inaccurate description of photographs and calling Giclees reproductions of photographs. Giclees are the current process of printing original photographs and the only time it's a reproduction is if the original already exists, like in a painting.
This is not the only show I know where the reproduction rules are NEVER enforced.... I actually think that no one is really put in charge in checking out the various booths and the show director only has so much time on their hands so it is difficult to police. I also found out that, if you bring it to the show's attention, they really don't want to hear about it.
I remember one show I used to do in Birmingham, MI said they are aware of the issue but hadn't really made a decision whether or not to get rid of the rule or keep it. The show no longer exists but they never changed the rule and never enforced. Another show in Ann Arbor, I note the artists put their reproduction giclees out after the jury has finished for the day. OKC Festival of Arts has a reproduction tent but the artists sell out of their booths and no one really enforces it or is aware it is happening. Since their are many photographers selling lower priced reproductions of photos (giclees), I think this rule is probably unfair to 2D artists but, if they don't like the rule, they don't have to exhibit at that particular show.
I have mixed feelings about this whole issue because I frankly prefer NOT to sell reproductions. I have done some and put them in the print tents to generate more income, but I absolutely support the rights of all 2D artists to be able to have at least one large print bin as a minimum.
Replies
I look at it this way, the painter did not make the reproduction they hired some company that does that kind of work. So is this any different than buy/sell? "
Yes it is different. Painters can and often do make their own reproductions. Sure there's some out there that outsource, but lots don't too.
Really, don't know what you are bitchin' about Warren.
The market will support what people feel is a fair price to pay for a piece of art. I take it you produce original works of art for big bucks. I produce original art for big bucks.
Are you mad because there's other mediums out there that can sell reproductions at lower price points to individuals who really can't afford anything more than $50-$100?
The market will not support, let's say, photographers destroying their negatives after one printing and selling as a true original for lets say $2500k. The concept has been tried, but not embraced. Has been tried by a few but I don't know of a single reknowned photographer that has a successful business model built on it. Nobody on the circuit does it. Ansel Adams didn't even do it. So why continue to bash photographers because of the way they produce their images to display at art shows? Not even the largest photographic works command the price that original sculptures, etc. do.
To say good photographers workflow consists of little more than pushing a button is easy, smug, convenient, and a big misconception.
Warren Townsend said:
And you're correct, in photography there is no one original.
How about starting a new thread about reproductions instead of posting to this thread?
>See Larry, you say it is okay for painters but did not mention the rest of us artist, you know the sculptors, glass folks or the clay workers.
Larry Berman
Digital Jury Services
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
Larry Berman
Digital Jury Services
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
Larry Berman
Digital Jury Services
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
Hope you will accept my most humble apologies.... I stand corrected.
I've supported the rights of artists to sell reproductions for 30 years so I agree with you. Last year the director of the Bethesda Row show called me and asked what I thought about reproductions and I explained that I'm totally for artists to be able to earn a living and shows should be juried on quality of the work and not marketing.
I do want to point out your inaccurate description of photographs and calling Giclees reproductions of photographs. Giclees are the current process of printing original photographs and the only time it's a reproduction is if the original already exists, like in a painting.
Larry Berman
Digital Jury Services
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
I remember one show I used to do in Birmingham, MI said they are aware of the issue but hadn't really made a decision whether or not to get rid of the rule or keep it. The show no longer exists but they never changed the rule and never enforced. Another show in Ann Arbor, I note the artists put their reproduction giclees out after the jury has finished for the day. OKC Festival of Arts has a reproduction tent but the artists sell out of their booths and no one really enforces it or is aware it is happening. Since their are many photographers selling lower priced reproductions of photos (giclees), I think this rule is probably unfair to 2D artists but, if they don't like the rule, they don't have to exhibit at that particular show.
I have mixed feelings about this whole issue because I frankly prefer NOT to sell reproductions. I have done some and put them in the print tents to generate more income, but I absolutely support the rights of all 2D artists to be able to have at least one large print bin as a minimum.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next