Nicely said Eddie
numbered edition prints
-
A
- Thread starter frank
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Transposing Frames for stereo photography, 45x107mm ("châssis alterneur")
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale Transposing Frames for stereo photography, 6x13cm ("châssis alterneur")
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale Transposing Frames for stereo photography, 7x16cm and 7x17cm ("châssis alterneur")
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale Antique Mackenstein 6.5x9cm contact printing frame (France)
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale NIKON 50mm f/1.2 Ai
- Started by Acere
Forum statistics
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
Is selling your work a large part of your income? Is it any part?
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.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,833
- Format
- Hybrid
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 $$, where someone might have an artist statement or comment
that seems to academic, galleries, art schools and other things. one can just add editioned prints to the list.
in other words, if you market and sell your work, you are more than a hobbyist and that isn't necessarily a good thing.
here on apug being creative, selling one's work for more than just gas money or a 6pack of beer seems to be
not-good. it is not hard to dig up thread after thread after thread where people gather pitchforks, and torches and trash talk
photographers who have sold work for $$, 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.
MattKing
Moderator
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.
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.
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.
Seems the same discussion as the last 20 times this was discussed in the Internet.
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??
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'...
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.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2012
- Messages
- 3,320
- Format
- 35mm RF
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,833
- Format
- Hybrid
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 ..
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.
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.
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 7,513
- Format
- 35mm RF
And I for one can not understand the interest in that image.
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.
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!
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".
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
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.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |