Smith/Chamlee Azo Portfolio

avandesande · Jan 8, 2006

I wish them luck with the portfolio and I hope the contact paper works out. It is about time the artists take control again of these materials. If he is successful it might make other ventures such as custom papers and film more palatable for the manufacturers.
Although Michael can be controversial at times he certainly seems to have been an inspiration for many people.

df cardwell · Jan 9, 2006

matt miller said:
I hope they succeed with this.

They say "Each portfolio will cost approximately $750 to produce". That sounds like a lot, to me, to print ten photographs. But then I have no idea in my mind how something like this would be presented. I suppose it's not just ten mounted/matted photographs in a fancy box?

A good print is expensive, in time and materials, to produce.

.

Jorge · Jan 9, 2006

avandesande said:
Jorge, I have to agree. All the prints are exquisite, but not necessarly masterpieces. I have noticed that Paula's subject matter is often similar to yours.

I noticed that we seem to have a similar "eye" towards composition. Of course I have not seen much of her work so I might be wrong. We both seem to get closer rather than looking for the grand landscape.

Donald Miller · Jan 9, 2006

jdef said:
Hi Jorge.

I've noticed that it is the norm to discuss MAS and Paula as a single entity, but I find Paula's work an order of magnitude more interesting and creative than MAS'. Am I alone in my assessment?

Jay

Jay,

My tastes are along the same lines when comparing the work of these two. I have discussed this with others and it may possibly be true to Paula's training as a painter.

reggie · Jan 9, 2006

Donald Miller said:
Jay,

My tastes are along the same lines when comparing the work of these two. I have discussed this with others and it may possibly be true to Paula's training as a painter.

I have felt for a long time now that Paula's work is superior to M's. I think MAS takes himself far too serisously in valuing his work (financially) above hers. I wish she could break away from her association with MAS and get out from under his wing so to speak.

I looked thru the portfolio and I don't think there is one single image worth $1k and the entire portfolio isn't worth the $10k+ they are asking, from either an aesthetic or investment point of view. They market it basically as a fundraising effort to get the new paper. I wonder if people would be entitled to a refund if they buy a portfolio and the paper doesn't come out?

As for the portfolio, there is a lot better quality work out in the market right now than this. And there are certainly better investment opportunities, if you approach photography from that point of view.

-R

jandc · Jan 9, 2006

Jim Chinn said:
...a paper that has not been made or tested by anyone yet.

Just a clarification. The paper has been made in pre production evaluation quantities and tested by both MAS and Paula.

mark · Jan 9, 2006

If it is already made, and up to snuff, why are they not trying to raise the money through preorders to raise money for the actual production. I don't mean the 5000 dollar order they list.

Those portfolios are not going to sell over night.

c6h6o3 · Jan 9, 2006

reggie said:
I looked thru the portfolio and I don't think there is one single image worth $1k and the entire portfolio isn't worth the $10k+ they are asking, from either an aesthetic or investment point of view.

Despite what you think a photograph is worth or should be worth, how much you are willing to pay for it or how much you may have paid for it in the past, a photograph shares a quality with nearly every other object which may be sold - houses, stocks, cars, jewelry, anything. It is "worth" the amount of money that someone is willing to give you for it. Not a penny more. Not a penny less. If the market will bear the price, it's worth that price.

Since Michael has been making most of his living selling prints for more than 35 years, I'd be willing to bet that he's gotten pretty good at judging what the collectors and instutitutions to which he sells will pay.

I hope they sell them all and bring this paper quickly to market.

MurrayMinchin · Jan 9, 2006

reggie said:
They market it basically as a fundraising effort to get the new paper. I wonder if people would be entitled to a refund if they buy a portfolio and the paper doesn't come out?

Good point!

Murray

reggie · Jan 9, 2006

c6h6o3 said:
Despite what you think a photograph is worth or should be worth, how much you are willing to pay for it or how much you may have paid for it in the past, a photograph shares a quality with nearly every other object which may be sold - houses, stocks, cars, jewelry, anything. It is "worth" the amount of money that someone is willing to give you for it. Not a penny more. Not a penny less. If the market will bear the price, it's worth that price.

Since Michael has been making most of his living selling prints for more than 35 years, I'd be willing to bet that he's gotten pretty good at judging what the collectors and instutitutions to which he sells will pay.

I hope they sell them all and bring this paper quickly to market.

So......I guess you'll put your money where your mouth is and buy one?

-R

jd callow · Jan 9, 2006

reggie said:
So......I guess you'll put your money where your mouth is and buy one?

-R

Reggie,
I read the post and what I see his mouth doing is stating that the market, not you or him sets the price, and that M&P have a print selling history and have, probably priced the portfolio accordingly.

Your post makes no sense, and appears to be needlessly aggressive.

photomc · Jan 9, 2006

This has been an interesting thread to read...and Donald I do appreciate the heads up, while not even a remote possiblity I could purchase one (and at the price would have to consider way to many other works - but a mute point as I do not have the funds).

But I do wonder how any one of us would feel, reading this thread if we were MAS...after all they are two different photographers, and their work shows that they are. While I may prefer some of Paula's work, there are works by MAS that I enjoy...but then I like work by Tillman Crane and Bruce Barnbaum as well. Not going to say anyone is right or wrong, we like what we like period (that is neither good or bad, but a reflection of who we are).

Is the price to high? Hell, I would not have a clue, but have seen other artist with work priced in the same neighborhood, so why would this seem over priced. Also, M&P did not start this post, so my guess is they know we are not their target market. The OP posted this to let anyone interested know that this available. So why some feel the need to say the value is to high or not makes no sense to me. If they can sell their work at the price mentioned, that is really just good for photography in general as far as I can tell.....but then I could have missed the whole point.

Curt · Jan 9, 2006

Paula's work is under valuated compared to the other. Her work is on par with anyone out there today. This 50% seems wrong, she is a role model for a lot of people. She has an eye for composition and is technically proficient and needs to arrive as an equal.

----------------

JandC

John Anderson, the email address in your personal information window of your web site is not accepting mail. I was going to tell you that I had a magical experience when I first went into the "Hall of Mosses" Dan Fear invited me to be in an exhibit at the Silver Image Gallery in 1975. Those were great years for me. All of the Ansel Adams, Weston and Weston, etc. to see for the first time. The PBS series with Joseph Campbell has been an influence in my life.

Curt

avandesande · Jan 9, 2006

They pretty much price their prints according to size. Since Paula shoots mostly 8x10, perhaps thats why they are half as much as a 8x20. Maybe we are looking to deeply.

reggie · Jan 9, 2006

mrcallow said:
Reggie,
I read the post and what I see his mouth doing is stating that the market, not you or him sets the price, and that M&P have a print selling history and have, probably priced the portfolio accordingly.

Your post makes no sense, and appears to be needlessly aggressive.

But the market did not set the price for the portfolio. MAS did, right? If one of the portfolios was put up for auction with no reserve and it sold for $10,750 then in that case the market would have set the price. In this case the seller has set a fixed price - not the same thing. So the price is debatable. It is a fair question to discuss the validity of the price and the work.

I am pretty familiar with the marketplace and I can state that this portfolio is not a wise investment of $10k. In the last 2 months I have invested over $13k in b&w photographs - work that I admire and that will make a great investment. If someone wanted to spend $10k on photography I could certainly point them towards better work that would appreciate more in value. A Brett Weston Mendenhall Glacier 11x14 just sold on eBay for about $4800 - that single image is a wiser investment than this entire portfolio not to mention a far superior image.

I don't discount institutional investment - if they have made a long-term decision to buy this work, then they will do so and will probably find the price attractive; but, this portfolio is marketed towards those with an interest in funding a new contact printing paper. Is anyone really going to spend over $10k to do that? Maybe it will sell. I know there are a lot of people out there that like this work. Maybe if all 50 sell out, the edition size can be increased to raise even more for the new AZO.

-R

c6h6o3 · Jan 9, 2006

reggie said:
So......I guess you'll put your money where your mouth is and buy one?

-R

Of course not. I can't afford that.

What I can or cannot afford has nothing to do with what they're worth. There are collections out there which can afford them, and in all probability will buy them. As I said, I hope they sell them all, and quickly, so that their new paper will be available within the next two years or so.

reggie · Jan 9, 2006

Thanks for answering. I wasn't trying to insult you or anything, I just wanted to put the question to you to see if you would spend the $11k if you had the money or the means to raise it. Do you look at the portfolio and immediately start thinking of ways to finance it or get the money to get it? Does it keep you up late thinking about it? That's what happens to me when I see a photograph that I simply must have.

BTW, what you can or cannot afford does have an impact on what they're worth, if you are a buyer. More than once I have told a seller I could not afford a certain price and suddenly things became negotiable.

I wonder how things would go if MAS took the portfolios and put them on eBay and sold them as a Dutch Auction or one by one with a reasonable reserve. Then the market truly would set the price.

-R

c6h6o3 · Jan 9, 2006

reggie said:
But the market did not set the price for the portfolio. MAS did, right? If one of the portfolios was put up for auction with no reserve and it sold for $10,750 then in that case the market would have set the price.

Now that's some interesting speculation. I'd love to see what they go for at a Christie's or Sotheby's auction.

John Bartley · Jan 9, 2006

Just sitting here reading these posts and wondering a bit from a background of having financed a business and a couple of companies and a building or two and having waited for the returns because I didn't have cash up front and had to borrow to get started ...and eventually paid for them all and sold a couple ...

M&P already have paper in the works ... they've tested it so it's been produced in at least a small quantity ... they have an idea of the cost and of the cash required to get to production (start up cash is not always the same as the cost)

If the portfolio project is not completely (or heaven forbid even partially) successful, will the paper still come to market? Is producing the paper dependant on selling the portfolios? Have they spent enough now and made enough commitments that they can't quit regardless of portfolio sales? Or are they at the decision making stage and the cash receipts from portfolio sales is the scale tipper?

Would this new paper have a better chance for success if the distribution were spread out thru' a dealer network with M&P acting as a wholesaler?

I don't have answers, I'm just curious. I can't see myself forking out 10k when I'm busy trying to get retired from working, but I hope there are enough buyers out there so that they do sell out.

jandc · Jan 9, 2006

Curt said:
JandC

John Anderson, the email address in your personal information window of your web site is not accepting mail. I was going to tell you that I had a magical experience when I first went into the "Hall of Mosses" Dan Fear invited me to be in an exhibit at the Silver Image Gallery in 1975. Those were great years for me. All of the Ansel Adams, Weston and Weston, etc. to see for the first time. The PBS series with Joseph Campbell has been an influence in my life.

Curt

John Anderson is a customer of ours who uses a lot of our Efke sheet films. We have his link up as a courtesy to him.

Thanks

Curt · Jan 9, 2006

Thank you JandC, I looked at every image that was posted and it's some of the best work I have seen. If he is using your film, Efke, then I am impressed. I can't wait for the Adox 25 and 50 in 2x3 to come in. Thank you for letting me know about John's profile on you site.

Curt

Jim Chinn · Jan 10, 2006

I believe that both Michael and Paula's work is collected by individuals and institutions. As far as the price per print, it is on par with work by contemporaries such as Kenna, Barnbaum, Citret and a few others. I just don't see a lot of individuals spending that kind of cash, but it is a big world and I think they are as well known in Europe as in the US among collectors. From a personal standpoint, if I had $10,500 to spend on a photography I would probably opt for a single Callahan, Siskind, Gibson or Brett Weston. Maybe a few Wynn Bullock prints are available for that price.

As far as who I like better really comes down to individual prints. They both have a different approach. I will say that the prints of Michael's that I think are good are as good as anything there is out there but others leave me cold. I think Paula's work is consistently good and her prints that were reproduced for the Tuscany book were wonderful.

clay · Jan 10, 2006

LOL, does that mean that the bleeding has stopped from the last purchase?

avandesande said:
) Suppose you are a well healed collector..

Joe Lipka · Jan 10, 2006

Buy a photograph for investment? You can, I guess, but why bother to mix art and business? I could sell photographs I have purchased, but they are so much a part of my life I really don't want to give them up.

I guess my approach would have been to offer shares of stock in a commerical venture to sell AZO paper. Investors grouped together to share in the fortune or failure of AZO paper. But, I didn't come up with the idea to try to keep AZO alive, so the alternative financing is the only available option.

Best wishes to M&P in this venture.

bill schwab · Jan 10, 2006

Joe Lipka said:
Buy a photograph for investment? You can, I guess, but why bother to mix art and business?

I recently spoke with a collector who has been selling-off a portion of his collection he had been building since the mid-70s. What he says cost less than $100,000 to collect over the years has so far brought more than $1,000,000. I'd say that is as good a reason as any to mix art and business.

Bill

Smith/Chamlee Azo Portfolio

avandesande

df cardwell

Jorge

Donald Miller

reggie

jandc

mark

c6h6o3

MurrayMinchin

Membership Council

reggie

jd callow

Moderator

photomc

Curt

avandesande

reggie

c6h6o3

reggie

c6h6o3

John Bartley

jandc

Curt

Jim Chinn

clay

Joe Lipka

bill schwab

Advertiser

Smith/Chamlee Azo Portfolio

Membership Council

Moderator

Advertiser

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency