Price for a photograph limited to "1/1" ?

[SusanK]

Just an idea that I've toyed with... how much would you ask for a photographic print that you limited to an edition size of one (and maybe one artist's proof for your own wall) ? Similar to what painters do, w/ the exception of the artist's proof.

Susan

 

[Trevor Crone]

Hi Susan,

The prospective client may want to know what you intend to do with the negative?
If you intend to only produce 2 prints, 1 to sell and the other the artist's proof then I believe the negative should be destroyed or at least rendered unprintable in someway.

With regard to the price that is more difficult to access, it depends on several factors, for example on how saleable your images are and what the market can take. Obviously I would expect the price to be much higher then if several editions were on offer.

Good luck,
Trevor.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

for an edition of one, the price should be "more", rather than "less". Beyond that, it is impossible to gauge without knowledge of your sales history and pricing. Given that you are not a "Name" photographer, I think limiting any edition of your work to just one would be professional suicide. You need to get your name and your images out there in front of people, and only having editions of one is not going to do that. Most galleries would not be interested in representing you with editions of one, because you'd have to be an absolute superstar to be able to produce work consistently of high enough quality that they'd have something to sell. And selling editions of one, nobody is going to buy your work if it isn't in a gallery. Of course, this can all change if you get really lucky and find the perfect customer who is enthusiastic beyond words and can/will show your work to all his/her best friends who will drop thousands at the tip of a hat on artwork the customer recommends. But that's not likely.

 

[SusanK]

Trevor ~ I failed to mention that, yes, I would destroy (or paper hole punch) the negative and maybe print a 5x7 of it to include with the print for the buyer.

SusanK

Hi Susan,

The prospective client may want to know what you intend to do with the negative?
If you intend to only produce 2 prints, 1 to sell and the other the artist's proof then I believe the negative should be destroyed or at least rendered unprintable in someway.

With regard to the price that is more difficult to access, it depends on several factors, for example on how saleable your images are and what the market can take. Obviously I would expect the price to be much higher then if several editions were on offer.

Good luck,
Trevor.

 

[SusanK]

FlyingCamera ~ To clarify, I have no intention of limiting every future negative to only one print. I've toyed with the idea of doing a 1/1 with a few negatives. As for it being "professional suicide"... I am now, and will always be, an amateur photographer (better than some, worse than others). I'm keeping my day job and the guaranteed paycheck/benefits that it provides. I'm not suffering from delusions of grandeur (in case anyone was wondering) and I have had enough negative experiences with galleries to last a lifetime. Honestly, I've sold more work off my website than I've ever sold through a gallery. The only thing galleries have done for me is drop, break, dent, scratch, and otherwise ruin my work. I'm not sure if they ever really "marketed" anything, but they did charge me a minimum of $50/month in wall rent plus 30-50% commission.


Susan

for an edition of one, the price should be "more", rather than "less". Beyond that, it is impossible to gauge without knowledge of your sales history and pricing. Given that you are not a "Name" photographer, I think limiting any edition of your work to just one would be professional suicide. You need to get your name and your images out there in front of people, and only having editions of one is not going to do that. Most galleries would not be interested in representing you with editions of one, because you'd have to be an absolute superstar to be able to produce work consistently of high enough quality that they'd have something to sell. And selling editions of one, nobody is going to buy your work if it isn't in a gallery. Of course, this can all change if you get really lucky and find the perfect customer who is enthusiastic beyond words and can/will show your work to all his/her best friends who will drop thousands at the tip of a hat on artwork the customer recommends. But that's not likely.

 

[removed account4]

susan

over the years i have made and sold single
edition photographs. they were sold
several years ago some and were printed on 8x10 paper some on 5x7.
none of them were full frame on the paper, and some were quite
a bit smaller than the paper size.
i don't know what i would price them at today.

i have also made single edition print books ( hand stitched japanese binding )
with a run of images in them. all given as gifts.

the negatives were created specifically for the image produced
and after a print was made the negative was removed from
the enlarger and dissassembled / destroyed.

i like making single prints.

john

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

FlyingCamera ~ To clarify, I have no intention of limiting every future negative to only one print. I've toyed with the idea of doing a 1/1 with a few negatives. As for it being "professional suicide"... I am now, and will always be, an amateur photographer (better than some, worse than others). I'm keeping my day job and the guaranteed paycheck/benefits that it provides. I'm not suffering from delusions of grandeur (in case anyone was wondering) and I have had enough negative experiences with galleries to last a lifetime. Honestly, I've sold more work off my website than I've ever sold through a gallery. The only thing galleries have done for me is drop, break, dent, scratch, and otherwise ruin my work. I'm not sure if they ever really "marketed" anything, but they did charge me a minimum of $50/month in wall rent plus 30-50% commission.


Susan

Susan- understood. Part of the problem with the galleries you were working with was the wall rent - they don't HAVE to market anything- actual sales are gravy to them, as the wall rent is the majority of their profit, and a guaranteed income stream. That's why they also didn't care about the proper care and handling of your work.

For now, I too am an amateur, but I do have delusions (or is it aspirations?) of grandeur and I intend to make a fine arts career happen. Just as galleries that sell work are selective about who they represent, you should be selective about who represents you, even if you are just going for weekend shoots and weekend sales.

 

[SusanK]

I donate work to a charity art auction that's held once a year. I shot a couple of rolls this afternoon's fog, which I've not yet processed. I was considering donating one of today's images in a 1/1 edition to the auction. Obviously, I would gain no monetary benefit, but the "really limited edition size" could be seen as a reason for the auction bidders to run up the price. I just need to set a starting point. I think it'd be fun to see what a print in that kind of situation might sell for.

 

[jovo]

It's ironic that painters are now having their unique work scanned and made into digital reproduction prints. These can be put in a bin and sold for a fraction of the price of the painting that may be hanging on the wall above the bin. As much as this practice makes me squirm, I do understand the motivation to get as much mileage out of one's efforts as possible.

But that's painting, not photography. The whole notion of a single available print is antithetical to what the photographic medium is designed to easily make: a reproducible artifact. Even the idea of limiting the edition is artificial and price driven. But..................boy it's an interesting idea. Give it a go. See what happens and let us know.

 

[SusanK]

John ~ Is it all that different from a "commissioned" photograph or painting...? In this case, it would be me, rather than a client, commissioning the photograph for a specific purpose.

p.s. ~ the negatives look good and just went into the wash.

 

[MP_Wayne]

If it's any help, I had a commission last year for a horrible tourist shot of a local famous lake in Banff (not the Peyto Lake image I posted - these were horrible). The buyer, from eastern Europe, wanted a couple of 4x5 Velvia Chromes. I threw out (what I thought to be) a ridiculous price of us $800 + expenses and he actually took it.

For your one-off, single edition print, I would think at least us $1000 would cover your troubles (as a minimum). My 2-bits.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Well, you might want to look at the price of Daguerreotypes, tintypes, and Polaroids (integral), all of which are single copies.

Dags, ancient and modern, will invariably reach a high price, but that's also because they are so rare and many are historically valuable, on top of being so hard to make.

At the other end of the technical and historical spectrum, the Polaroid can retail from free in a garage sale bin to any ludicrous price a dealer wants to give it. Who took it is of paramount importance.

So, if you want to have an estimate for the price of a 1/1 edition, think about who you are and what your name is worth. Are you famous? Are people massing to get into your openings? Are people actively collecting your work, and get excited when they find a new work of yours?

Otherwise, I would say just add 50% to your usual sales price for the heck of it and make it appear more rare.

 

[JBrunner]

Just an idea that I've toyed with... how much would you ask for a photographic print that you limited to an edition size of one (and maybe one artist's proof for your own wall) ? Similar to what painters do, w/ the exception of the artist's proof.

Susan

I have an unprinted negative that I will destroy, and send you the pieces....0/0. $3600.





How large are your editions, normally? Take that figure- x prints x sales@ x dollars minus production costs for the ones not printed = a fair price for your edition of 1.

In other words, if your edition is normally 20 and they sell for $100 each, and it costs you $500 in time and materials to make the twenty prints, then an edition of one of your prints would be theoretically be worth $1500.

Of course the true value of a print is what somebody will pay, and that can be a surprise, either way.

 

[SusanK]

I was thinking along the lines of $1500. Truth be told.... I've seen worse "art" go for $1500+ at this auction, by artists that I've never heard of either.

I should add... one year I had a photograph bid up to and sell for $825 (starting from $250). Again, this is a charity auction.

 

[jovo]

John ~ Is it all that different from a "commissioned" photograph or painting...?

Good point. You don't see the eleventeenth iteration of a politician's photographic formal portrait for their government office floating around on the bay, do you.

 

[Sparky]

Number of prints in the edition is utterly meaningless. Price is set by what the market will pay for it. If you have a great exhibition record and your work is talked about in the press - then you can start with a thousand, I suppose.... but then again - if that was the case, you'd probably be selling anyway - and would have a good idea how to price your stuff. There's no meaningful reason to have a limited edition, in my opinion. You'll just mark yourself as pretentious - and artificially limit the spread of your work. All such discussions are, IMO, meaningless until you start selling lots...

 

[keithwms]

Along the lines of what Michel said... if you want to do single prints then why not simply shoot LF polaroid. I have heard that 20x24 polaroids sell for thousands. Not my bag, pushing that kind of gear around, but I do like 8x10s.

 

[Shawn Rahman]

In other words, if your edition is normally 20 and they sell for $100 each, and it costs you $500 in time and materials to make the twenty prints, then an edition of one of your prints would be theoretically be worth $1500.

I am humbled and amazed at the thought of selling 20 prints of one picture at ANY price. Power to you!

 

[SusanK]

Keith ~ I don't have the strength to cart around a 20x24. I can barely lug around the equipment that I have now.

hkr ~ Presently, my edition sizes stop at 50. And I have sold through number 20 of a couple of prints at $300/each. Another photographer friend of mine has sold all 50 editions at $250/each of one of his prints.

 

[keithwms]

Susan how 'bout 8x10 polaroid then?

 

[Rich Ullsmith]

This is an interesting discussion, because I've had some issues about this myself, particularly with lith, which is difficult to duplicate results. Someone will say, I want that one and I say "that" one is not for sale, but . . . I will go back to the negative and get five or six I am happy with, and you can have first choice of those, and then I'll kill the neg. As you can imagine, I don't sell much. They don't care about limited edition; they just want that thing on the wall.

 

[Jim Jones]

A charity auction may not be a valid gauge of value. Since I'm an amateur who's not out to gouge friends and neighbors here in rural Missouri, I've been selling open edition framed B&W 12x16 photos for $40. They will be slightly higher next year. One of these photos brought $160 at a charity auction. The buyer may have considered business or tax deductions and the contribution to a good cause. Expensive limited editions are a marketing ploy, and deny affordable art to most people.

 

[Bandicoot]

I have an unprinted negative that I will destroy, and send you the pieces....0/0. $3600.

Pah! for £3,500 I'll sell you a description of the scene, a map reference for the location, and details of the weather at the time for a picture I saw but didn't actually take.

For £35,000 I'll cut the tree down, so no one else will be able to take it either!



Peter

(Who never thought that he'd find a way to combine his brief lumberjacking experience with fine art photography before...)

 

[jeroldharter]

I donate work to a charity art auction that's held once a year...

How do you assign a "fair market value" for prints that you donate to charity?

 

[SusanK]

Jerold ~ I don't know how you assign a "fair market value", that's why I brought the topic up. As I mentioned, my work has always been on the low end of the starting bids at this auction. Other artists' work, some of which are quite similar to mine, have started three and four times higher. It's like throwing a dart when it comes to setting the starting bid.