numbered edition prints

Bob Carnie · Jan 30, 2016

Nicely said Eddie

eddie said:
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.

Sirius Glass · Jan 30, 2016

Numbered print editions: Are just pretentious, I have better things to do with my time. Printing and then destroying the negative - talk about your basic drama queen

eddie · Jan 30, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
Numbered print editions: Are just pretentious, I have better things to do with my time.

Is selling your work a large part of your income? Is it any part?

eddie · Jan 30, 2016

Bob Carnie said:
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.

I think this is the fundamental difference in how marketing is being perceived in this thread. There are those who have the goal of making a nice photograph, and hanging it on their wall. Others have the goal of making a nice photograph, and having it hang on many walls. The view of "marketing" depends on which camp you're in.

removed account4 · Jan 30, 2016

eddie

here on apug being creative, selling one's work for more than just gas money or a 6pack of beer seems to be
not-good. it is not hard to dig up thread after thread after thread where people gather pitchforks, and torches and trash talk
photographers who have sold work for $$, where someone might have an artist statement or comment
that seems to academic, galleries, art schools and other things. one can just add editioned prints to the list.
in other words, if you market and sell your work, you are more than a hobbyist and that isn't necessarily a good thing.

Sirius Glass · Jan 30, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
Numbered print editions: Are just pretentious, I have better things to do with my time.

eddie said:
Is selling your work a large part of your income? Is it any part?

See my PM.

The short answer is no.

MattKing · Jan 30, 2016

It is pretentious if you aren't selling (or donating) individual photographic prints.

Note that I didn't say "selling your work".

There are many ways of selling (or even sharing) your photography that don't involve placing a relatively high value on a single print.

eddie · Jan 30, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
See my PM.

The short answer is no.

I read your PM, but I'll respond here.
Since your answer is "no", you're really in no position to judge how those (who do earn their livings through sales) go about creating their market. Limiting an edition isn't pretentious. It's simply a way to balance supply and demand. No different than any other business.

Richard S. (rich815) · Jan 30, 2016

Seems the same discussion as the last 20 times this was discussed in the Internet.

Sirius Glass · Jan 30, 2016

eddie said:
I read your PM, but I'll respond here.
Since your answer is "no", you're really in no position to judge how those (who do earn their livings through sales) go about creating their market. Limiting an edition isn't pretentious. It's simply a way to balance supply and demand. No different than any other business.

The last time I checked, I am allowed to have an opinion about numbered print editions, especially since I have purchased matted framed photographs. Who died and made you god??

Sirius Glass · Jan 30, 2016

Richard S. (rich815) said:
Seems the same discussion as the last 20 times this was discussed in the Internet.

Within 10% which is good enough for government work.

RalphLambrecht · Jan 30, 2016

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

Brooks Jensen of Lens Works fame wrote a beautiful article about this subject'What Size is the Edition?' and gave me permission to publish it in my book 'Way Beyond Monochrome'.Take a look if you can;it's very good advise from somebody who is actually selling prints.If I just had a $ for every print numbered '1 of 500'...

eddie · Jan 30, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
The last time I checked, I am allowed to have an opinion about numbered print editions, especially since I have purchased matted framed photographs. Who died and made you god??

I was merely pointing out that your claim that those of us who limit editions of our work as being pretentious is wrong. Making a universal statement on something you have no experience with is what is pretentious. No higher power was invoked in my response to your post.

Patrick Robert James · Jan 30, 2016

This is pretty simple. You want to sell as many as possible. Collectors want the only one, after all they are "collectors." You meet somewhere in the middle.

In reality, it doesn't matter for the vast majority of people. You will be lucky to sell a few of any particular image unless you get famous. Even then you may not sell out of an edition. I know people who have large editions, one being 250. He sells them out, and is sick of the image by the end. Everything is a balance.

Editions are only meaningful to the honest. If you take a look at Eggleston's attempted entrance into the larger art market and the resulting bruhaha brought by a collector of his dye prints when the large inkjets were announced, you can get the picture.

On a basic level most photographs are bought by people who simply like them. When you start to sell photographs for the big bucks (say more than a few thousand) then most photography sold is bought by people who are gambling that it will be worth more in the future. I would bet anything that most of the Eggleston prints produced recently were bought by people who were counting on the old geezer to part from this earth, thereby enhancing their investment.

On a slightly different note, I would hazard a guess that the large prints you see today are just as much caused by editioning as the ease of making them in this digital world we live in.

Sirius Glass · Jan 30, 2016

I am not a collector. I buy prints that I like and I do not care about resale value of prints, cameras, lenses or cars. I buy what I want because I want it. The only thing that I will buy for speculation is real estate property and those do not have numbered editions.

Bob Carnie · Jan 30, 2016

You have described a contemporary collector of photography. And there is nothing wrong with this.. Many people buy large colour images for huge amounts to hang to enjoy in their time and really do not care if they fade or not.

Sirius Glass said:
I am not a collector. I buy prints that I like and I do not care about resale value of prints, cameras, lenses or cars. I buy what I want because I want it. The only thing that I will buy for speculation is real estate property and those do not have numbered editions.

Sirius Glass · Jan 30, 2016

Bob Carnie said:
You have described a contemporary collector of photography. And there is nothing wrong with this.. Many people buy large colour images for huge amounts to hang to enjoy in their time and really do not care if they fade or not.

Sirius Glass said:

I am not a collector. I buy prints that I like and I do not care about resale value of prints, cameras, lenses or cars. I buy what I want because I want it. The only thing that I will buy for speculation is real estate property and those do not have numbered editions.

Click to expand...

Oh, I care if they fade. I would really get pissed if they did, however I have had them for over 15 years and they have not faded.

removed account4 · Jan 30, 2016

Bob Carnie said:
You have described a contemporary collector of photography. And there is nothing wrong with this.. Many people buy large colour images for huge amounts to hang to enjoy in their time and really do not care if they fade or not.

it seems museums too are doing this, and probably struggling with some sort of way to conserve the image/s they purchased.
im sure there are museums that have non ciba, non dye transfer, non gum over &c prints purchased as an unstable color photograph
purchased for lots of $$$ and they are kind of cranky that they are fading, shifting &c ...
unless, like cliveh did, the fade/conversion was part of the package . i've thought of selling retina prints but
i always worried that they would turn black or white in transit and then all they would get is an homage to kazimir severinovich malevich ..

frank · Jan 30, 2016

Thank you all for your considered comments and opinions. (Sorry that the question stirred up some animosity.) When I called editioning a marketing ploy, I was not assigning a judgement, positive or negative.

I'm selling an 8x10 fiber print for $100. I posted the image on Facebook and was contacted by someone who was touched by it. Small potatoes, I know. The buyer asked about edition prints. For this amount, I don't think I'll bother. I'm not likely to become famous or have plans to do so.

RobC · Jan 30, 2016

eddie said:
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.

Adams made over 1300 prints of Moonrise over Henandez. I don't think he did limited editions for that and its his most famous print and valuable on the market today.

cliveh · Jan 30, 2016

RobC said:
Adams made over 1300 prints of Moonrise over Henandez. I don't think he did limited editions for that and its his most famous print and valuable on the market today.

And I for one can not understand the interest in that image.

eddie · Jan 30, 2016

RobC said:
Adams made over 1300 prints of Moonrise over Henandez. I don't think he did limited editions for that and its his most famous print and valuable on the market today.

You can't compare famous photographers/photographs to the 99% of us who sell our work. A large portion of those buyers are buying as an investment, keeping track of auctions in order to gauge the resale value.
For the vast majority of us, people purchase because they like the work, appreciate the hand crafted nature of it, and (for those to whom limited editioning matters) the relative rarity of their purchase.

Arklatexian · Jan 31, 2016

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

Might there not be another good reason to make a numbered (limited) edition of prints? I don't shoot photographs for money but I would think that, if I printed an edition of 25/50/100, and I printed all of them to the best of my ability, I would get almost physically ill looking at the same image that many times and never look at it again....I like photography but, I'm afraid, not that much. Not the same print over, and over, and over......Regards!

scheimfluger_77 · Jan 31, 2016

Bob Carnie said:
...
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.

...

This makes a whole lot sense to me, I don't think I've come across this method in all the "schemes" I've read about. For instance selling a set (2, 3, or more) of related (but not identical) images allows you to skirt the headache of editioning a specific set, or "run".

scheimfluger_77 · Jan 31, 2016

Personally I don't believe selling prints in limited editions is automatically wrong/bad/arrogant etc. In fact I have great respect for those of you who make your living photographically. I learned early on that I did not want to depend on photography for my rent, it would have become a hated mistress. I did not want to hate photography. Consequently my work is inconsistent and spotty when viewed from the place of lifetime achievements, but I accept that because I have something to look forward to in retirement.

Back to the point of editioning. It is a valid strategy and if an artist can use it appropriately, I say go for it. Perhaps the larger issue is how to make it a workable strategy for you. The practice allows you some control over income from your own creative efforts.

Destroying one's negatives at the end of a lifetime seems the height of folly--to me. You've just guaranteed that others--and only others--will benefit from your work as time goes on. I think of my negs, good, bad, and pointless as my babies. Destroying them seems like infanticide. Perhaps that is a curious attitude from a pre-retirement white male, but it's how I feel.

numbered edition prints

Bob Carnie

Sirius Glass

eddie

eddie

removed account4

Sirius Glass

MattKing

Moderator

eddie

Richard S. (rich815)

Sirius Glass

Sirius Glass

RalphLambrecht

eddie

Patrick Robert James

Sirius Glass

Bob Carnie

Sirius Glass

removed account4

frank

Attachments

RobC

cliveh

eddie

Arklatexian

scheimfluger_77

scheimfluger_77

numbered edition prints

Moderator

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency