numbered edition prints

[frank]

I'm thinking that making numbered edition prints is mainly a marketing ploy? Do you do this? Talk to me about this please.

 

[cliveh]

Definitely an out dated marketing ploy. Let the market determine how many you sell, 5 or 5 million.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I like edition prints - I keep mine under 7 - If I could I would do single print editions but I find that coming back to the print sometimes can give a better version.

I edition the image not the process or size of image, which allows me flexibility to make the prints with other process.
Which means I could have within this edition, silver , or pt pd or cyanotype versions of the same image.


I do not see this a ploy but rather a way assuring that only a certain number get printed from any image. This can help create a rarity of each print .

Of course there are all kinds of people who come up with silly methods of getting around this simple method of printmaking.{ some may think my edition methods are silly )

 

[wildbill]

yes, mine are numbered.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[RobC]

I'm thinking that making numbered edition prints is mainly a marketing ploy? Do you do this? Talk to me about this please.

correct. It is designed to make the buyer believe they are getting something worth more due to its rarity. Its like in car shows when they so love to tell you that only 50 of a special model were ever made so they are special because of their rarity.
The buying public just don't realise that the vast majority of your work that is put on sale is never likely to sell in numbers more than single digits if you're lucky.

What I find very odd is that there is nothing stopping you from selling second or thrid editions and more if you happen to produce one image that does sell well. And in fact just one of your images could be the only one to make you a lot of money if many people wanted to buy it so it would be pretty stupid to limit yourself from selling it.

 

[Hilo]

What I find very odd is that there is nothing stopping you from selling second or thrid editions and more if you happen to produce one image that does sell well. And in fact just one of your images could be the only one to make you a lot of money if many people wanted to buy it so it would be pretty stupid to limit yourself from selling it.

Very wrong ! To sell out an edition is the best thing that can happen to the artist. It is when buyers will be asking about other images that have only a few left in the edition. Any respectable gallerist will not let an artist do a 2nd or more editions. It is like biting your own tail.

 

[RobC]

Very wrong ! To sell out an edition is the best thing that can happen to the artist. It is when buyers will be asking about other images that have only a few left in the edition. Any respectable gallerist will not let an artist do a 2nd or more editions. It is like biting your own tail.

So the gallery owners dictate how many of any image you are allowed to sell.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

...

What I find very odd is that there is nothing stopping you from selling second or thrid editions ...

Even if you'll have number of prints matching the number of negative pieces which were individually attached to each print?

 

[Hilo]

So the gallery owners dictate how many of any image you are allowed to sell.

No, that part is something an artist decides for him/her self. Together with the gallery, sure, but it is your own decision. Any serious artist will study this part of the business and get advise from various sides. It is not something you just do. It is my experience that the very strong artists are also very precise in how they want to sell their prints.

Years ago, let's say 20 - 25 years, photographers who finished the edition would change the size of the prints and begin a new edition. That hardly happens anymore.

 

[RobC]

including a certificate of authenticity seems to be a trendy thing to do these days too. Not sure what difference it is supposed to make but people do it anyway.

 

[Slixtiesix]

I think it all depends on the clientele you are aiming at...

 

[eddie]

I number mine, and I'm unmoved by those who think it's a stupid marketing ploy. I've found it to be a smart marketing ploy.

 

[RobC]

I have no problem with numbering them but I do have a problem with limiting them.

 

[eddie]

I number and limit. I should have been clearer.

 

[skorpiius]

I once heard a comment from a photographer who did limited numbered editions, I think 100 prints, not necessarily because of the marketing, but because it forced him to go out and take more photos if it did sell out.

 

[michaelorr]

I photograph for myself - looking to sometime in my remaining lifetime have made a print that i like enough to hang on my own wall. Not there yet. I have been intrigued for a long time, though, about this very question. Is there a difference between what might be called a numbered edition and a limited edition. Or is there an implicit understanding or expectation that an owner of no. x/y of an edition has a print that will never be available again? I find it fascinating that a photographer would sell off or pass to someone else exclusive rights to his image. To give up the creative growth, opportunity, evolving and re-interpretation of a negative to a print. I do get, such as Ansel Adams, that one would produce a limited number of portfolios to sell to promote their work, and raise money to continue with future work. But those images have been printed thousands upon thousand times and sold. And in the case of Ansel not too long before he died his backlog of print orders that he accepted was staggering and probably unfulfillable. And again, in the case of Ansel Adams, his prints evolved over time to his changing mood or vision or likes, and the prints are different, look different, feel different. Who would sell off being able to do that? Just curious...

 

[MattKing]

If you are selling to people who consider the resale value of art when they are buying art then numbered editions make total sense.

If you are selling to people who need something nice over the sofa, not so much.

 

[RobC]

fact is that very few of us will ever sell prints that if put into a specialist photographic print auction by the original buyer say 20 years later, would sell for as much as the original purchase price 20 years earlier. Only if you become "well known" enough would they have a slight chance of reaching original purchase price unless you were giving them away or were portraits of very well known people or nudes. The point being that anyone thinking that your prints are a good investment becasue of their rarity in most cases is deluded.

The long and the short of it is that limited editions are a marketing ploy relying on buyers ignorance pure and simple, simple being the operative word.

 

[eddie]

The long and the short of it is that limited editions are a marketing ploy relying on buyers ignorance pure and simple, simple being the operative word.

It has nothing to do with ignorance. People like exclusivity. Photographers savvy enough to realize this use it to their advantage. Yes, it is marketing. But, it's smart marketing in that you've limited availability, increasing interest, and raised the perceived value. It's basic business and, if your business is selling your artwork, you need to approach it as a business.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I do not market my prints. I only make a few large prints of a negative and I do not number them.

 

[pschwart]

assuring that only a certain number get printed from any image. This can help create a rarity of each print .

And how is this not a marketing ploy?

 

[Bob Carnie]

Good question - I will give it a try.

This is a very complex subject for those involved with making and selling photographs. And judging by the comments on this thread and others threads about rarity, archival aspects, many
here on APUG do not give a rats ass, and I can understand for some of them photography is just a casual friend but for me its an extremely important life passion.
I actually kept a silver gelatin fiber lab open these last 25 years and I can assure you it has been tough, and I could have done much better financially by dumping this process.
Therefore I must have a very poor marketing plan for my business. I am even crazy enough to try to sell pt pd prints and pigment over as my future plan.

Prints are only a rarity if people are wanting to buy them --- Marketing Ploy is very funny description --- coming from a Continent (North America) where every one is selling something and every one has a ploy for their product I do not think edition ones work as a ploy but actually a business, artistic decision that needs to be made by all of us producing prints for sale.

There are many ploy's but I think the most telling value of ones work is the resale value , I know many people who edition large #'s of their work and got away with selling the prints at what I considered high price. 1/100 for example 30 x 40 print selling for $4500 with absolutely no track record.
(look into the potato or Lik image debate) - what is the resale value of any Lik print?
Some people that bought an edition print try to resell the print on the open market and find they cannot get even half the price they paid or anything whatsoever. In fact in
some cases the photographer is selling the same print for less years later.
This is why one must be careful on how they want to approach a selling market. For those who do not care to sell their photography, everything I am saying here means nothing.

By having a low edition - and being loyal to the number - if people actually like your work there becomes a resell market and your work is considered of value, now
by saying this I do understand it takes over 25 years to be known and for a lot of us that resale value may only benefit our children's , children.

I understand many here on APUG are hobbyists , fans of photographers, technical geeks who love the process, or gadget freeks, so when this topic comes
up a lot of uninformed opinions start flying around. (personal favorite are the dumpster and pizza box solution for ones life work)


I would much rather own a Brett Weston print than an Ansel Adams print- basically because Brett did place a limit on his prints- and if rumors are correct he destroyed his negatives.
I am not sure how many Brassai prints are out there but they are certainly rare and valuable.
I am the proud owner of a Vivian Maier pt pd it was made in edition of 5. - I can pretty much assure you the value of this print keeps going up due to its rarity (is this a marketing ploy or is it just an artistic business decision)



As a printer and exhibition space owner I get asked this question every week, and over the years I have came to the low edition numbering system as being the best option for myself and
I advise this method for my clients.
Another method I see being just assigning a number to a print and just keep on printing if the image is desirable. I actually know a photographer who IMO will hit the world market
and this will be his Marketing Ploy. I can guarantee the commercial galleys that he will need worldwide will have a different view and it will be fun to see how he approaches this matter.

I am rambling now so I will leave it but IMO editioning prints with a low number is not a marketing ploy but rather a smart business move.

Bob

And how is this not a marketing ploy?

 

[ic-racer]

I'm thinking that making numbered edition prints is mainly a marketing ploy? Do you do this? Talk to me about this please.

Since there is usually no degradation of the negative during the printing process, the numbers won't really relate to anything other than the date, and the numbers could continue almost indefinately. Why not just date the prints?

 

[removed account4]

personally, i like making SINGLE prints of some of my work.
i don't like dwelling on the same image and printing out 5 or 10 or 25 copies of it,
and i have no place to store 5 or 10 or 25 copies of the print either. i can see how people
do numbered editions, and are faithful the edition, but from what i read about people doing this sort of thing ..
they print a different size, they print a different paper, or tonality &c it doesn't count as part of the edition so
in the end they both cheat themselves and the people who were told it was #2 out of 6 prints made ... and
that doesn't even bring into play digital likenesses to an image ( a deep resolution scan printed a different way )..
i still have some of my original hybrid work in clamshell boxes i made IDK 20-25 years ago.
when i say hybrid i don't mean digital/analog i mean hand made, assembled and machine(camera)made negatives
they never made it to the scanner. they are singular images and people who have bought them like the fact
there aren't any like them printed by me or replicated by a machine because they know after an image was made,
the negative was dissassembled+destroyed and couldn't be made again.
i've said this before, the endless replication that photography offers becasue of a negative is its greatest power, and greatest weakness.

 

[eddie]

I don't know why the term "marketing" is being used in a negative way. If your goal is to sell your work, marketing is part of the process. When you show a portfolio, you're marketing. When your work hangs in a gallery, you're marketing. If you have a website with prices, you're marketing. To be successful, you have to market your work.