'Fine Art' and 'just another pitcher'...

jnanian said:

peter

you should know by now, some people just like to complain.

if it isn't about the weather, it is about how some people sell photographs for less than $30 and if it isn't about that, it is about the people who sell photographs for $800 or more, or someone is an artist, or a "wannabe/sell-out". at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter.

i don't know what i am, i am just here for the ride.


john

Click to expand...

Good point, that.
And very true, Mr Schwab, very true. This is hearsay at this point - not accusing anyone of lying, but context and prior exchanges can easily be misunderstod or outright missed. Still, fun gabbing about this stuff Personally, I can't wait to sell out. (I think I am stealing that from The Who or someone like that).

Peter.

billschwab said:

Allegedly...

Remember, only one of us was there and that person has not chimed-in since starting this whole thread. Apparently the photographer we are all talking over does come here as stated by the original poster who also presented a biased attitude that makes me question what really happened. I would still very much like to hear the photographer's side of this story.

B.

Click to expand...

An interesting discussion, but I have to say I'm not entirely sure about the ettiquette of posting this thread, especially as the photographer is a member here. Can't complain because I've joined in as much as anyone, but...if I were the photographer in question I would think twice about chiming in after all this caboodle...

I must admit, I too am guilty of being a tempremental photographer and getting annoyed at such coments as being discussed here. Not direct finger pointing intended.

It can be very frustrating to spend so much time, energy, emotion to put a show together, and not even recoup your expenses with just one sale. I hope the show sells out!

However, the viewing public does need to be educated and nursed along on just how unique a single image can be. To spend days, months, even years, visiting locations, repeatedly, only to carve out a fraction to a few seconds of existence onto a piece of film and print it for posterity.

http://www.recirca.com/artnews/475.shtml

The value of fine art photography has been growing and sales at auction for older images proves that out.

However, the viewing public does need to be educated and nursed along on just how unique a single image can be. To spend days, months, even years, visiting locations, repeatedly, only to carve out a fraction to a few seconds of existence onto a piece of film and print it for posterity.

Click to expand...

Depending on how good the gallery is, this can fall under the owner's territotry, but then, shouldnt the photographer extend him/herself a little and do some of the education, specially at the opening? Look, there is really nothing wrong with being an artiste and having the angst of the world on your shoulders, but then it is easier to attarct bees with honey than wiht shit....

Yes, the incident happened and it happened in Utah within the past 24 months. I know the photographer as well as the lady mentioned. I didn't think a lot of it but was recently talking with the lady and she mentioned it. (she has original photos from at least 6 Utah photographers I know)
She goes to a number of galleries and looks at art of various types and purchases at least two pieces per year to keep, not to resell. I know some years she has purchased as many as a dozen art pieces, two being her minimum goal per year and the top end limited by finances.
The photographer in question will not be named as he may yet learn what it is that he/she is doing. The show was spotty in quality with some prints still in need of spotting, mats that weren't up to snuff and frames that were scuffed & a bit worn on some images. No cohesion to the work shown. Looked like it was taken from a number of people rather than one photographer who had a vision and could show it. Not a top effort but it did have some images that showed promise.
The photographer seemed defensive and I know, from previously having talked with her/him that they didn't understand the difference in critique and criticism and responded too often with attacks rather than taking the time finding out what was actually being asked.
I posted because I have seen this type of question asked and handled well a number of times by a number of photographers at shows. This photographer handled it poorly. From having talked with her before I wonder if he does know what the term 'fine art' means, or his/her definition?
I waited to post for the specific reason of not making the person easily identified. If I wanted to offend or take them to task it would be easy to do. I chose not to do so. They are still young and can learn and the images/effort show promise and I hope this person keeps with it so in the future they sell to more than family/relatives/close friends at discounted prices.
As to how quickly I respond or post on this. Am out shooting these days and just don't sit in front of this electronic hellbox that often. Idaho and Wyoming are looking great these days... as is SoDakota. The bridges of Madison County are still there but I didn't see Clint Eastwood though I did visit the birth home of John Wayne.

billschwab said:

You making a living doing that Jim? Or is this just a hobby for you? No tongue in cheek.. I'm seriously curious.

Bill

Click to expand...

There is some profit, but certainly not enough to make a living. It does help pay for a photography habit. Perhaps, if i raised prices a bit and sold in every possible venue, it would become a real job. I enjoy photography too much for that.

MurrayMinchin said:

Hi Jim,

. . . Wouldn't you want to see where your images land amongst your peers? Don't you feel what you have to say has more than a local interest?

I don't know how old you are or how many jobs you've had, but I'm in my mid 40's and have found that every job comes with compromises. I'm a letter carrier right now, which is THE BEST JOB I'VE EVER HAD! Yet...it takes time away from my being in the forest photographing.

Murray

Click to expand...

I am egotistical enough to have submitted a portfolio to the American B&W Magazine, but not upset that I missed the final cut. As for jobs, I'm 73 and retired, so selling photographs isn't a necessity. I substituted on rural mail routes for years, and agree that its an interesting job. There are photo ops on a country mail route, too.

Jim Jones said:

I enjoy photography too much for that.

Click to expand...

I can see your point there Jim. Making it your job does take a little of the fun out of it and I'm always looking for other hobbies. There are ways to keep it fresh though as long as you keep looking for them, but that too can be part of the job. Good that you are able to offset some of your costs.

Bill

jhavard said:

A fine art print expresses something, whereas just another picture does nothing more than capture the moment.

Click to expand...

What about expressing the moment.

Jim Jones said:

For me? Yes, if it didn't involve so much work that it became drudgery. That would happen quickly. However, I'd rather continue selling 11x14 archivally mounted, matted, and framed B&W prints for $40 to people who appreciate them than to work hard to get rich in a snobbish market. Photographs and other prints can bring affordable pleasure to many. Also, in the local market I don't have to wear a suit to impress people that I am an arteeest.

Click to expand...

Personally, I would rather sell my prints to anyone who wants to buy them. I don't care about class distinction.

FWIW, my prints are Fuji Crystal, triple matted in 100% rag, non buffered, museum board, archival dust cover back and Tru Vue Museum Glass. My prints are expensive, because I use the highest quality materials I can get - it makes me feel good to sell and present them that way.

Jorge said:

Depending on how good the gallery is, this can fall under the owner's territotry, but then, shouldnt the photographer extend him/herself a little and do some of the education, specially at the opening? Look, there is really nothing wrong with being an artiste and having the angst of the world on your shoulders, but then it is easier to attarct bees with honey than wiht shit....

Click to expand...

Artists at the opening is very helpful for sales for sure and ultimately that is what it is all about, making sales. Certainly that is what the galley is in business for and would not hang an artists works unless they felt they would sell. For 50% of the selling price, the gallery had better put out the bulk of the effort in selling.

Who really invests more time and energy into a work, the artist or the salesman, obviously the artist. But then who really has the selling advantage, the gallery. They have pretty much an endless parade of artist's work they can pick and choose from to sell and can keep or dismiss artists as trends and sales fluctuate. The artist only has himself to produce works to sell, based on his own style, medium.

So yes the artist has far more worries to consider and frustrations to overcome. Just vent them away from the prospective buyers.

WarEaglemtn said:

This photographer handled it poorly.

Click to expand...

It seems to me as though the "photographer" wasn't the only one that handled this poorly.

Bill

Gay Larson said:

I'm sure I am behind the times but I consider a fine art print one that expresses something to the viewer and also is printed on fiber based fine art paper, limited in printing.

Click to expand...

ha haa - oh jeesh - it has to be printed on a special kind of paper to make it art....?! yep - right

Gay Larson said:

I'm sure I am behind the times but I consider a fine art print one that expresses something to the viewer and also is printed on fiber based fine art paper, limited in printing. I of course work in black and white so I am quite prejudiced.

Click to expand...

I guess you don't consider color to be fine art then, since there are no fiber based color papers.

Colour FB paper existed until around 1970. So obviously, no fine art photo has been produced in colour since 1970.

jhavard said:

A fine art print expresses something, whereas just another picture does nothing more than capture the moment.

Click to expand...

So Cartier Bresson and his decisive moment are not art and therefore just drugstore snaps? Forgive me then B&W magazine, by your definition, is full of fine art. ;-)

This is all very simple to quantify:

1. If printed huge and square it is ART.
2. If printed rediculously small and overmatted to 24x30, this too is ART.
3. Everything else is crap.

See how easy that is? Problem solved. We can all now go back to shooting pictures (uh, I mean CRAP).

If you want to get a good idea of what fine art photography is, then have a look at John Blakemore's 'Black & White Photography Workshop' ( see also AA's 'The Print', etc)- it's the blending of craft skills and vision by the photographer to produce an image that has that little extra bit of magic and makes you go 'wow' (can be b&w or colour).

I would submit that some are overly sensitive to "titles" - and far too quick to judge people on their motives.

I've been thinking .. "Fine Art" does have its use in describing a particular TYPE of photography ... as does "Sports Photography", "Street Photography", "News", "Lansdscape" --- "Railroad" -- and probably a host of others. I'd name more, but I'm running out of quotation marks.

One submits a photograph to an exhibition. On the submssion form there is .. "Check One ... Sports, ... Fine Art ..."
For the greatest majority of my work, I'd check "Fine Art" .. not becase I want to pre-judge or pump-up my work ... but I believe it is the only category that fits ... or at least the best choice of the category that fiits.

I'm contemplating alternatives: "Art Photography" - omitting "Fine" --- immediately I would envision photography OF art. Photographs of statues, other peoples' paintings ...

"Fine Photography" - omitting "art" ... I don't think I've ever seen a description of any work using that particular description. I would have the image of a shingle - the sign proclaiming an early photographer's studio - most likely suggesting well-done portraiture...

Possibly "Fine Art Photography" IS pretentious, possibly there is an assumption - warranted or not - of the photographer's expertise and skill ...

But, I think that this description is, like Churchill's description of Democracy - "The worst of all - except for all of the others". .

Ed Sukach said:

...
For the greatest majority of my work, I'd check "Fine Art" .. not becase I want to pre-judge or pump-up my work ... but I believe it is the only category that fits ... or at least the best choice of the category that fiits...

Click to expand...

Yet another reason I'm glad I have become an Ambrotypist.

joe

"I know nothing about art but I know what I like."

I think that sums it up. To me I can appreciate a Winslow Homer or an Ansel Adams. I am also the same person who wouldn't walk across the street to see a Picasso painting. In my view a kindergartener could do the same thing. A lot of the "fine art" photographs are snapshots taken by snobs.

At least I admit all my work is garbage. If some people like it, that's cool but I won't demand high prices for it or expect it. Sure I've had a photo in an art gallery but most of my photos hang in the homes of the finest friends and family I could ask for.