Marketing Music History!

[Jim Fitzgerald]

In October I was given the opportunity to photograph a rare and highly sought after musical instrument. I was given the rights to photograph this instrument and to be able to offer the only fine art prints. This instrument will be auctioned at Christy's in January of 2008. The instrument is expected to bring from $ 1.2 to $2 million. My prints are going to be published in a book on the life of the artist who used this instrument. It is one of the last collectible pieces of music history.

I was happy just to photograph this instrument for my own use but the owner has told me that I need to take this opportunity to make some money. Kids in college, ex wife, working three jobs now, I guess I should not blow this. My questions to the community are:

Do I offer a limited edition series of fine art prints? How many? Do I offer it at collectors prices? I'm thinking 8x10,11x14 and 16x20. Also, there were five set ups so maybe a collection?

Do I offer a series of maybe lower end prints (ink jet)?

My website is under construction now and I'm thinking globally. Many of these collector items go overseas and the dollar is weak and buys a lot more now. I have heard of unbelievable prices being paid. I honestly do not expect to get rich with this but one never knows?

I will have a period of 4 months after the auction to work with the owner before he turns the instrument over. He is planning another book on the history of the instrument and the musicians who use this type of instrument. He wants me to photograph them in black and white and we need the time to do this. I can not say what the instrument is at this time so please don't ask. All advice is welcome and maybe some of you will be put off by the fact that I'm trying to cash in on this. If it was not me then it would be someone else, right? Thank you.


Jim

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Jim-

I think you will make money on this, but I think the individual offering this to you is overstating his case. The owner of the instrument will get rich, you will not.

As to business advice, I would do both the limited edition and the poster prints. That gets you to a larger audience. Since you can't identify the instrument type and who it belonged to, I'll be more general: identify your target audience (classical music lovers, rock n' roll fans, etc), and figure out possible venues to show your work in. You will have to either go to these venues in person, or hire someone to go there to market your product. You should also advertise for it in periodicals that cater to your target audience. Perhaps put together a really nice 10-15 print portfolio of these images and offer them to galleries that target your target audience. The galleries that will take this portfolio will more likely be more commercial in nature as opposed to fine-art galleries.

 

[Ole]

You don't have to say; I can guess. The only musical instruments that regularly get that kind of price are Cremonese string instruments, probably a Stradivarius violin.

If that's correct, I would think that a numbered limited edition portfolio of five shots in one single size is the best bet. Match the size to the instrument; if you can offer a series in 1:1 that will certainly be best. Inkjet prints may follow later, at a strongly reduced price - anyone interested in those instruments will want the best you can deliver, and won't be interested in a "cheap" version.

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Thank you both for the advice. Ole, no it is not a Stradivarius. It is a piece of rock/blues history. The owner of this instrument is entrenched in the music business. Yes he will make money, a lot of money. He has privately been offered $1.5 million already and wants to offer this to a wider audience, hence Christy's. Believe me when I tell you he does not need the money. But he is a business man and I understand that. I just want to make sure I take advantage of the opportunity I have been offered.
I am working on ideas for marketing right now and all of the suggestions are helpful.
How does one determine a price for a limited edition? I don't want to offer cheap prints. That would be an insult to the instrument and the man who played it. I also don't want to limit my options. Thanks.

Jim

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

First, I think you need to decide if it will be in color or in b/w.

Regardless of the medium, I would offer the following for consideration:

It is considered acceptable to do multiple editions of the same image in different sizes -
i.e., an edition of 50 8x10 prints, 25 11x14 prints, and 10 16x20 prints from the same negative.
This is considered fairly common practice. Pricing should be determined by the number of prints in the edition of that size. Again, common practice is to price larger prints more than smaller prints, and higher prices for smaller edition sizes. The value of a photograph in the fine art market is largely driven by the name of the artist on the bottom of the print. In your case, since you are not a "name" artist, and the value of the image will be largely determined by the subject of the photograph, I would look into pricing for similar photographs or artworks that have been serially reproduced and sold commercially. Honestly, I'd look into talking to those art galleries that set up in large shopping malls about such a thing, as they will have the most experience with marketing similar artwork. Places like The Franklin Mint, Wentworth Gallery, and so on.

IF you have aspirations of becoming an artist with a capital A, I would consider marketing these images under a pseudonym, because it will be very "commercial" and taint your reputation in the fine art gallery world. I would also recommend getting a copy of the Photographers Marketplace (it is an annual publication that has contact information for publishers who buy photography), and researching calendar, poster and other kinds of publishers who might be interested in using your images, for use at a later date.

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

First, I think you need to decide if it will be in color or in b/w.

Regardless of the medium, I would offer the following for consideration:

It is considered acceptable to do multiple editions of the same image in different sizes -
i.e., an edition of 50 8x10 prints, 25 11x14 prints, and 10 16x20 prints from the same negative.
This is considered fairly common practice. Pricing should be determined by the number of prints in the edition of that size. Again, common practice is to price larger prints more than smaller prints, and higher prices for smaller edition sizes. The value of a photograph in the fine art market is largely driven by the name of the artist on the bottom of the print. In your case, since you are not a "name" artist, and the value of the image will be largely determined by the subject of the photograph, I would look into pricing for similar photographs or artworks that have been serially reproduced and sold commercially. Honestly, I'd look into talking to those art galleries that set up in large shopping malls about such a thing, as they will have the most experience with marketing similar artwork. Places like The Franklin Mint, Wentworth Gallery, and so on.

IF you have aspirations of becoming an artist with a capital A, I would consider marketing these images under a pseudonym, because it will be very "commercial" and taint your reputation in the fine art gallery world. I would also recommend getting a copy of the Photographers Marketplace (it is an annual publication that has contact information for publishers who buy photography), and researching calendar, poster and other kinds of publishers who might be interested in using your images, for use at a later date.

Scott, I can't thank you enough for your sound advice. Yes, I am an "unknown" but maybe that can add to the whole marketing approach. I finished printing the last set of 8x10's just now. I have a meeting tomorrow with the owner and need to give him images to be included in the forth coming book. I will keep you informed. By the way it is in black and white only.

Jim

 

[Kirk Keyes]

It's not named "Lucille" is it? Anyway, please let us know which guitar it is when you can.

 

[PVia]

Jim...

That's great! Nice opportunity for you...and of course, can't wait to hear the details when you're allowed to speak about it...and most of all to see what I know are some amazing photographs!

Paul

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I have a meeting today with the owner. I hope to have some more info soon. Kirk it is not " Lucille". Good guess though. It is very unique. Hopefully I can post more specific information today.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Lucille is not unique. BB names all of his guitars Lucille. According to Wikipedia (take it for what it is worth), he began the tradition after a fire in a club he was playing, where two men fighting over a woman named Lucille knocked over a bucket of kerosene being used to heat the club. He ran out, realized when he got outside that he forgot his guitar, and ran back in to get it. He named his guitar Lucille to remind him not to be so stupid again in the future. Lucille is a black lacquer Gibson, and you can buy one yourself with the Lucille signature on it from Gibson if you want. Besides, BB is still alive, so if the original Lucille is still out there, he probably has it.

 

[Ole]

There is only one guitar I can think of that is unique enough to get that kind of price - but last I heard Brian May is not selling.

 

[Steve Smith]

There is only one guitar I can think of that is unique enough to get that kind of price - but last I heard Brian May is not selling.

I'm not selling mine!

And whats all this talk of very unique and unique enough? Something's either unique or it isn't, there are no degrees of uniqueness. (pedantic bit over!).


Steve.

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

The artist who owned this guitar is sadly no longer with us.


Jim

 

[bill schwab]

Hi Jim,

Congratulations on the opportunity. Unfortunately, I would not think that the usual collectors of "fine art photographs" would have much of an interest in such a print. Your market is most likely going to be very limited. I would target my marketing toward those that would have an interest. Perhaps ads in magazines pertaining to the particular genre would be your best bet. Or, if you have deep pockets and really think you have something, you might try renting a booth at musical trade conferences. You also might consider posters or note cards that you can market through music stores, etc. I am certainly not trying to be discouraging, but I can tell you from a lot of experience that trying to market a single image or several images of a single subject to any great profit is difficult to say the least. Consider that the energy spent in a venture like this may be much more than any return you realize. It might be better if you just charge the guy a good sum for making the photographs in the first place. If he is as wealthy as you say and is going to make a large sum from this instrument, you should not be doing this for money you might make. I would consider that an insult. Also, In a case of a rare instrument like this, there might only be a handful of people willing to part with big bucks for the actual instrument. I think there might be even less willing to part with their money for a simple photograph of that instrument. I hope I am wrong!

Bill

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Bill, thank you for your honesty. I need honest answers! Yes it would be nice to make some money and maybe a decent amount. But like I said I was truly honored just to be able to photograph this fine instrument. I am happy if the prints are just for me. The reality of the situation is that people who collect rare guitars and people in the music business and the fans will be very interested in this. I will target my approach to them. Bill, thanks again for your honesty.

Jim

 

[bill schwab]

..like I said I was truly honored just to be able to photograph this fine instrument.

I understand. I once had a chance to photograph the instruments of one of my rock and roll heros after his death for a CD of his work and I found it truly amazing to have my hands on the actual guitars that made some of my favorite music.

I wish you the best of luck with this Jim!

Bill

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Bill, probably the best thing about this is the fact that I got to play this guitar! That was something I will never forget!

Jim

 

[Ian Grant]

Like you Jim & Bill I've had the opportunity to photograph rare guitars owned by legendary rock stars, in fact one of my images of a National Steel was used by a record company a few years ago. The owner actually a vocalist has just played a major re-union concert only the 2nd in about 25+ years

Ian

 

[TracyStorer]

???

Can't wait to find out who and what guitar so I know how jealous to be...

Bill, probably the best thing about this is the fact that I got to play this guitar! That was something I will never forget!

Jim

 

[bill schwab]

The owner actually a vocalist has just played a major re-union concert only the 2nd in about 25+ years

And what a show it was!

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

OK, everyone! The meeting i had yesterday went very well. I don't know the link but there was a guitar show in Dallas, it might have been a NAM show and there was a picture taken of the guitar. Try googling Dallas Guitar show and looking in the photo gallery. It is in there.I have been told by the owner that it is ok to talk about it.
The guitar is the first actual professional guitar that was played by Stevie Ray Vaughn! It is a 1952 Fender Telecaster that was given to him by his older brother Jimmie Vaughn. The guitar is unique in that there is something on the back that makes it very valuable to the music and collecting community. It has been authenticated by Jimmie Vaughn as the first guitar his brother played professionally. Stevie traded the guitar many years ago and in an interview several years later he said he would gladly have whoever had the guitar rape his bank account for whatever amount of money to get it back. The guitar has been out of sight for many years and has been highly sought after by many collectors worldwide.
My friend wants me to photograph it in color also but I have concerns about that. I do not develop color and I would not want to have any copies of the back get out before the auction. I need some suggestions on color 4x5 film to shoot and also a lab or an individual who can develop color with me present the whole time. I am in the LA California area and I need to protect my client first and my self second.
This is one of the last pieces of rock/blues history left and Stevie will be eligible for induction into the rock and roll hall of fame in 2008. The book that is being published is Day by Day, Night After Night.
I know that there are many in the music community that would love to own a print of this instrument. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know, but am I wrong in thinking that American rock/blues collecting of original art is big in Asia?
Now that this is out i would love to have some honest answers to my questions. Thanks to everyone so far.


Jim

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Jim-

given what this instrument is, I would DEFINITELY photograph it in color. I don't think it will sell well in black-and-white. Rock-n-roll is all about being loud, bold and larger than life, with intense colors and sensations. I can't recommend a specific lab to you in LA, but I would call a few and explain the situation, and be absolutely honest about every detail you have mentioned here.

Yes, there is a significant market for rock-n-roll memorabilia and collectibles in Asia. It has been the Japanese, but the Chinese are getting into the game as they have become wealthier. It is likely that the buyer who made the $1.5m offer is from one of those two places.

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Scott, you are correct. The offer a year ago was from a Japanese collector. It was genuine and verified. It has been a while since I've shot any color and the last time was Velvia. I'm thinking Astia, Provia of Kodak VS. The guitar has great vintage stains from all of the bars. The wood is natural Ash and it is visually a fantastic piece to see. I've been given the ok for the color shoot after the holidays, just have to decide on film.

Jim

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I'd go for something a bit more natural in color, either Astia or the Kodak VS, if you're shooting transparency. In a negative film, I'd go for Kodak 160 NC.

 

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Great, just checked the fridge. I've got some 160 NC but it is 8x10! That could be interesting! Got some 400 NC but it is out of date. Time to make a trip to Freestyle and get some fresh color film. Scott, thanks.

Jim