I originally discovered AFI when I was starting to search for shows outside the Pacific NW and discovered a lot of good information on this site. I was particularly interested in all the information on improving images for jurying and improving the booth image, etc. as we were discouraged last year on continued rejections from shows we really wanted to participate in.
So, we signed up for the Virtual Jury process offered by AFSB, net result, we needed a new photographer and bigger “Wow” pieces, not just our bread and butter best sellers. So we proceeded to design some new pieces, hired a new photographer, we revamped our booth and hired Larry Berman to edit our images and drastically clean up our booth shot. We have one show we need 7 images for so in the end, between the new photographer, the virtual jury and the photo editing we spent over 1K in preparing for 2012 applications.
End result? We’re still sorting that out. However, I tend to be the overly analytical person in this partnership while my husband is the total opposite and he had a good chuckle when he looked at part of this post. I’ve already driven him nuts with my verbal analysis and ongoing conversation so I thought I’d share the results with this community in hopes that someone might be able to offer a unique perspective or some feedback. If I’m spending 1K, I want to know if it was worth it and given a 16 year work history in the CFO organization of my day job, an MBA in Finance and a work career in which I’ve had “analyst” in my job title for over 20 years, I tend to overanalyze everything!! And yes, my husband is snickering over this part of the post:)
For the first time ever we were only waitlisted for one show this year, all others were outright acceptances or rejections. That in itself was a great change, we usually have 4-8 waitlists that leave us wondering, agonizing and trying to decide if we needed to change travel plans at the last minute. Unfortunately the one that we were waitlisted for was a show we’ve done for 4 years in a row and has been in our top 5 shows every year. So that didn’t feel very good as it is an early season show and was one of the first shows we submitted our new images to the jury.
As the acceptances / rejections continue to arrive, here are our final results:
- Shows we applied to for the first time: 5 declined, 11 accepted, a little better than our normal average of about 65%
- A little more disclosure on this, of the 11 we were accepted into, I truly believe 5 of them were “jury by check”, but they were back up shows if we didn’t get into our first choice.
- 2 of the shows we were accepted into, we had been told were very hard to get into, so that left us feeling relieved and able to back out of 2 of the jury by check shows.
- 2 of the new shows are already completed with dismal to mediocre results which made us question our decisions for show scheduling.
- A little more disclosure on this, of the 11 we were accepted into, I truly believe 5 of them were “jury by check”, but they were back up shows if we didn’t get into our first choice.
- Shows that declined us this year after previously accepting us with our old images: 1 – ouch, that didn’t feel right
- Shows that waitlisted us after previously accepting us with the old images: 1 - ouch
- Shows that had previously rejected us
- And still rejected us: 7
- 2012 accepted for the first time: 2, Yay!! Both of these were shows that we’ve been wanting to do for a while, however, both will replace solid, fairly reliable 2 day shows with 3 day shows and will result in an additional trip out of town. So, until we see the show sales results, the jury is still out, so to speak.
- Shows we’ve previously been accepted at on a regular basis and still want us back:) 7
- Shows we’ve previously been accepted – but never consistently on a year to year basis:
- 3 shows, 2 accepted, 1 rejected
- Pending – still have one left to notify for a December show, but fully expect to be accepted, although I should never think that anything is an automatic in this business.
So, we applied to 37 shows for which we know the results. 15 declined, 22 accepted, shows we’ll actually do: 17, some were apps for the same weekend and a couple shows we declined because we couldn’t put together a road trip that made sense, only getting into 1 out of 3 shows that were a 13-15 hour road trip away didn’t make financial sense.
We started the year with a disappointment after not getting called off the one waitlist we were on, we now have 2 shows on our schedule that we’ve tried to get accepted into in the past that are highly rated that are leaving us with high hopes. We also have 3 other new shows that we applied to for the first time that we have high hopes for, plus our regular schedule of favorite shows that are “tried and true”, so we’re hoping the rest of the year will be stronger than the start of our year.
Was the $1K worth it? We think so, we feel like we’ve gotten into a few better, more promising shows. However, getting waitlisted for the spring show we have done for 4 years and getting rejected from a show that we were accepted into last year left us feeling a little perplexed when we felt like we had a better jury submission. In the end, sales results will tell us if it’s worth it, we’ll continue to track the results and come back to this question in December.
Not sure if this helps anyone, but thought I’d share our journey through the process of trying to improve our images and “up our game”.
Comments
Ruth, as before, I really enjoyed reading your post. It has given me a new way to examine things. I do not have a very analytic background, at least not in this way, and I love the idea of trying to look at show acceptances and rejections from a quantifying way. I realize that there are a lot of intangibles, but at least at the end of the season you have some percentages of acceptance, rejection, wait-listing and so forth to compare to your own data from a different time. We, too have been upgrading our booth and pictures, and hopefully will be able to see some improvements as well. Best of luck and keep analyzing!
Thanks for your introspective post Ruth. These economic times require introspection. I think you have done a great job analyzing everything and in the end you will be thankful you up-graded your jury shots. That shouldn't be a waste of time and money.
Good sales and shows to you Ruth.
I occasionally get analytical about my results and can often be left depressed LOL. Better images though have got to help in the long run and the cost will pay for itself over the next few years. The shows that rejected you this time round (after accepting you year after year previously) perhaps didn't recognise your work?
Ruth, about the piece that took a year to sell. There's something to be said for having a
WOW piece or two on display to catch people's attention. It may take a long time to sell, but that's not its function. It's there to bring in people and sell other work. Also, if you're applying with images of these higher end pieces it would be good to have some so you can show that your work is consistant with your jury images.
Oh...you are right, Don. I wasn't very clear in that statement.
My "track record" at the show has nothing to do with the jury, actually. I said that meaning that because I've done it many times, my work seems to be in that strange pocket where it's seen as "right for the show". Now, that sounds again like the jury knows my record but what I mean is that shows tend to pick jurors that are often somehow connected to the show, the community or even long-time artists at that show.
By doing that, they consciously (or unconsciously) are directing their show to a feel they have determined they want. And I think that even though the jurors don't know my work or are stepping back from that knowledge if they do, the collective mindset of the jury the show has put in place is probably more likely to keep moving in the same general direction with the work that is chosen. That is to say that if a show in City X has been getting the same kind of jurors for years who know that show and that city, their choices, even if by differing individuals, is probably going to be somewhat similar. However, if one year they get all their jurors instead from, say, New York City, it's going to have a completely different feel and "what has always worked to get into the show" may not have a chance that time.
Yeah, I know. That explanation is clear as mud. AND, the reality is that it doesn't always work that way. It's more a hunch on my part than anything else and it's why I put it last among the factors that have probably influenced my success with some juries.
There have certainly been instances of shows that I've done several times suddenly dump me. One in particular recently went through a year where a large percentage of long-time artists were suddenly out. Nobody every really knew why but there was speculation that the organizers went in a completely new direction with their jury and it upended what we had all become complacent about. Who knows? But that's kind of in line with what I'm trying to say.
In the end, it's really all one big lottery, I suppose!
David, you made a comment in one of your posts that I've heard others make in one form or another and it's always puzzled me a bit.
You said "I think it's a combination of luck (one of those intangibles!), my work (there's not a lot similar to it), my jury images (VERY important) and shows that I've generally done many times and have a track record with."
It's the last part of the statement that I've wondered about many times and still don't have a clear understanding. If a show has an impartial jury that changes from year to year how can the track record and the number of times you've done it have any effect on the present? I've always felt that by doing a show consistently for a long time one might have an edge over a person applying for the first time (all other things being equal) but, can that be possible? There is one particular top-tier show in which I've been accepted Spring and Fall every year, for several years, until this year and, "boom", the ax fell and I've been rejected twice. I catch myself wondering how these people can possibly be so rude to me when I've been so "loyal" to them! I know it's crazy. But, thay's why I'm wondering about your statement and would like to know a little more about what you mean. I'm not doubting or questioning what you said. Would just like to understand it a little better. It just seems that each show's jury process would remove any and all past success (or failure) one might have developed with a particular show and the clock starts over with each application.
Thanks for the responses, I especially appreciate, "Trying to apply that kind of analysis will only drive you nuts"! I can totally relate to that comment, at the same time I really felt like I needed to study the results of this year's jury process as we did spend a large dollar amount to change our jury images, not including the time and materials invested in some of those new "Wow" pieces, one that we just sold this past weekend. Note it took a year to sell, great jury image, but probably not a design we'll make again when it takes that long to sell.
Part of my rationale was to determine if there were just shows we were likely never to get accepted into knowing that jewelry is so competitive. There are at least 4 shows we've applied for multiple times that after studying which jewelry artists were accepted last year and this year, I realize we just don't fit their mold and will probably never get accepted, I will save our jury fees next year.
I know there are a lot of variables we can't control and we'll continue to learn as we go along but last year when we started down this path we had been doing shows for over 5 years and were getting very discouraged with our jury results. We're feeling like there were some improvements this year and are hoping for ongiong improvement in the future.
No belittlement taken, David, and you are right, especially since at the very same show I heard this, I watched the photographer next to me make a killing. I am trying to asses my next year based on everything I have learned so far. If someone says they have been doing this for twenty years, and they have seen a change, it is not what is used to be, I listen. I also watch, and that is how I noticed the photographer make a lot of money that weekend. I understand very well, that the people who make it, learn how to adapt. Since I am so new to this, I am in a sense constantly adapting, partially because I don't always know what I am doing.
I also am so very thankful I am able to do this, I do understand how fortunate I am. I just wish the path was a little clearer sometimes. I only came up with the poll idea because it really helps me to asses things sometimes when I hear of others experiences. Yes, so many variables.
Making comparisons of acceptance rates from one artist to the next is probably not going to create a very clear picture of anything, actually. We each have widely varying approaches to the business with regard to the number of shows we can do each year and, therefore, how many we apply to and which shows they are.
For example, my very time-intensive work doesn't allow me to pack in the large number of shows that many do. At best, I can comfortably do 12-14 shows a year, tops. For that reason, I try to focus on those that have the greatest opportunity for a return on my investment--the ones likely to have the highest sales to costs ratio.
For 2012, I have actually applied to only 13 shows. I got 12 of them--one off the wait list. So I have a 92% acceptance rate--obviously high. I think it's a combination of luck (one of those intangibles!), my work (there's not a lot similar to it), my jury images (VERY important) and shows that I've generally done many times and have a track record with. Things could be very different in 2013 due to that multitude of intangibles that exist.
Now, this gets off topic and certainly not to belittle you Kimberly and every other of the multitude of artists who've said it, but the statement "the art fair business is not what it used to be" just kinda makes me smile a bit every time I read or hear it.
I've been showing my work in various kinds of venues--originally via only "western art shows" and for the last number of years in the "art fair" world--since 1986. From the very beginning of my very first show, I've heard artists saying that phrase. Yeah, I know that things have changed considerably in this business over time but we all need to adapt. Tough economies make it extremely challenging, yes, but it's just one layer to consider.
Two of my best sales years ever have been in the depths of "bad times": late 2001 (right after 9/11) through 2002 and then again in 2010. I cannot explain it except that my work found a groove that connected with people despite the economy and/or 'fear' that existed.
Every business changes and evolves, like it or not. And, as harsh as it may sound, tough times weed out the people who probably should not have been in this art business to begin with. That is, those who saw it as an easy way to make a buck. I've always believed and continue so, that the best artists survive the 'hard times' and come out the other end just fine. The weak go away and do something else. This is a cycle like so many we've gone through.
So much great information in this thread! Based on these comments, better photos and some "WOW" pieces. I usually pick pieces to photograph that represent my "typical". Now I realize that really isn't the best idea.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next