Interesting as he was furiously anti-edition when speaking about it to me, told me of Kim doing this with his negative on the back of the mount and how he had pleaded with him not to do so. This was end of the 90's... shows how people change I guess.Nope this was Cole in the Mid 80's at the Camera Obscura Gallery in Denver.
While your points about galleries are well reasoned, do you think there is something to be said for galleries helping create markets, to stimulate interest and inspiration?
You bet there are Doug. I just didn't want to make their argument for them! There's been a long history in the fine arts of gallery owners, or patrons, who supported an artist financially so he or she could concentrate on creating more art. Sadly, this is far from the norm.
My impression (from waaaaay out here at roads end on the northwestern edge of the continent...and remember, that letter was written 5 years ago) is that there are some gallery owners who bellied up to the trough to get rich, and some collectors who only buy photographs to add to their investment portfolio. Neither has the long term welfare of the photographer in mind, except in somehow increasing the purchase price of the photographs. My point was that the Internet allows photographers another way to sell their work without having to play the game by their rules.
The trick is, a) how to get people to discover your photography, b) how to get people to realize the worth of your photographs without a gallery holding peoples hands, or without giving your work a 'stamp of approval', and c) what kind of pricing structure will work for you and your images.
Murray
I've just taken a quick look (art - photographs - contemporary) on what I think is UK e-bay. It must be very discouraging for photographers who are serious about their work to see the going price for other prints up for grabs - hardly covering the cost of a machine print.
Safe to say, e-bay does not generally appear to "represent" the kind of work referred to through this thread.... that often seems to rest with galleries and photographer's own websites. There are exceptions as some people have said through this thread; obviously many advantages and disadvantages to the various outlets to weigh up.
Just out of curiosity, we put a print up for sale on e-bay a couple of years ago. It was an 8x10" black and white print I'd shot and printed. There was just a little interest and it did sell for a few £'s.
While my ego would love it if I sold some prints and even more if I made some real money out of it, it doesn't quite feel the right thing to do. In trying to work out my unease, it does seem to cheapen the image, or is it a case of vanity? I can't quite put my finger on it.
Is it the right thing to do?
This is one of those things that amuses me in landscape photographers. The fact they feel they need to travel the globe in search of landscapes that have not been made. While I love to travel and shoot, my best images are made in my own backyard and it is these that sell the most. I mean no disrespect to the Michael Kennas, Rolfe Horns or Josef Hoflehners out there as their work is quite beautiful, but I think photographers like this have also become a dime a dozen group and I have a hard time getting excited about any of it anymore. So do collectors if sales are any indication. It has become painfully obvious. There are too many shooters looking at the Michael Kenna business model and thinking they too can do it. They aren't looking to make great work, they're looking to make a living... to be famous. To me that is all bull&%$#. I think people need to look inward rather than outward to make their images great.
Nice, but very, VERY Michael Kenna if you ask me. He and others would do well to find their own vision IMO.has anyone seen Josef's recent work from China? It's very good..... IMO......
Having spent the morning looking at Michael Kenna's work I must agree with you Bill. Nobody gets ahead by following someone else!Nice, but very, VERY Michael Kenna if you ask me. He and others would do well to find their own vision IMO.
Bill
I can speak from experience here Dave. Emulating someone's work is one thing, but trying to market work that is so close in style AND subject to someone so well-known must be difficult.Nobody gets ahead by following someone else!
The point being if you aren't in the highest quality creative level of the masters you have to shoot in a way that sells if you are to eat.
Having spent the morning looking at Michael Kenna's work I must agree with you Bill. Nobody gets ahead by following someone else!
Cut negative on 10 or 12 pieces,put it on small plastic bag and glued on the back side on every photo from limited edition.Interesting discussion about editions. I always thought that to sell limited editions, you had to have established some reputation. At least some of the value of a limited edition print is that after you have sold the last number of the edition - there will be no more made, and the buyer needs to have some confidence in that fact.
Bob
Just out of curiosity, we put a print up for sale on e-bay a couple of years ago. It was an 8x10" black and white print I'd shot and printed. There was just a little interest and it did sell for a few £'s.
While my ego would love it if I sold some prints and even more if I made some real money out of it, it doesn't quite feel the right thing to do. In trying to work out my unease, it does seem to cheapen the image, or is it a case of vanity? I can't quite put my finger on it.
Is it the right thing to do?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?