Blog

Comments

• 

  David Hipwell June 14, 2010 at 8:08am

  Using my new rating system, this show gets one DAVEY out of 5 possible.
• 

  David Hipwell June 4, 2010 at 11:02am

  Nels: From here on my prints are not reproductions......they are multi-originals......of course if I made a copy of a multi-original....that would be a print......lol
• 

  David Hipwell June 1, 2010 at 8:20pm

  Julia......I dont have to sell originals unless I want to ....and that happens only if enter a fair that requires originals to be sold. Many painters sell a lot of prints and not many originals. Unfortunately the public wants low cost originals to a greater degree.....low cost does not go with originals.....I refuse to sell an original painting for cheap. The public wants low cost so I offer them low cost prints. I respect your comment. But I hardly agree with it. What you think of my business practices is not something I would ever listen too.
  
  Nels: I am very happy that photographers can sell prints or whatever they choose to sell.....my only point is that painters request the same treatment as photographers....we want to sell prints too............or sell copies on canvas......etc etc etc......or sell originals if we want to and can get the price we want.....
• 

  Willie McTell June 1, 2010 at 6:42pm

  yeah i know Nels. i know that's a photographer's definition of photography. i was just joking around a little since some have been arguing about that quite a bit lately. i really was not trying to start it up all over again. its about like discussing religion (or the lack thereof) . no one ever changes anyone's mind. they just restate their positions over and over.
• 

  Willie McTell June 1, 2010 at 5:45pm

  hey julie. stop calling me names. that's just ignorant.
• 

  Julia Niles June 1, 2010 at 2:49pm

  "The promoter was quite upset that I did not bring any originals, just prints"--
  
  
  The question would be why in the world would you not bring any originals....to an art show with 100 other "great artists".....
  
  and OMG enough of the photographer bashing, this is getting really quite ignorant.
  
  Maybe there was no atttendance, etc, but wouldn't it be nice too if we all could put our egos aside and maybe look to ourselves once in awhile to why things happen as they do?
• 

  Nels Johnson June 1, 2010 at 2:40pm

  Actually Willie the discussion talked about the unique medium that photography is. If a photographer took one of his finished products made from either a negative, a slide or a digital file and then made a copy of this(like taking a picture of the picture) you could certainly call that a reproduction. Photos are unique--but sorry, they are not reproductions.
• 

  Willie McTell May 31, 2010 at 7:58pm

  ha ha. yep. somewhere on this site there is a discussion about how a photographer can make just as many reproductions as he likes and they are never reproductions. or something like that. i think a photographer made that up so it must be true.