Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,760   Posts: 1,516,052   Online: 864
      
Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 128
  1. #21
    NikoSperi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Italy
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    576
    Images
    15
    No, I think he has tried a time-old method of arousing interest in his rag: controversy sells magazines. Consider it the same way one sees a troll in these forums.
    If you tone it down alot, it almost becomes bearable.

    - Walker Evans on using color

  2. #22
    Nicole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,547
    Images
    8
    Which magazine?

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    934
    Images
    115
    Interesting thread. I have read the article in lenswork and it seems to me that the way the brooks jensen can justify his selling price of 8x10 images for $20 is based on his working methond of capturing photos digitally and printing them on demand. His magazine provides a means to advertise his work to an audence of subscribers and his overhead of running the website and magazine is probably covered by sales of the magazine. He does not have to make up the costs of advertising and marketing his artwork because that is covered from another revenue source other than print sales (magazine sales) thus he can charge $20 for a print.

    If I were a working artist and I paid all my expenses of marketing, material, travel, gallery fees, etc.. from my insurance business then I could see charging $20 for a print (that is if I worked digitally...I don't). This is nothing but an accounting ruse. The average working artist does not have many other revenue streams to expense there costs incurred as an artist and therefore can't charge $20 for a print regardless of their working methodology.

  4. #24
    Davec101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, U.K
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    897
    Images
    125
    Have only been able to read the first page of the article in lenswork as it is the only one available on the preview pdf of this particular issue however the point he makes initially in this introductory page does ring a chord with me.

    I have seen some recent contemporary photography at Paris photo with astronomical prices that I feel is just unbelievable and the pricing is a con.

    When Brooks Jensen refers to ‘the large “chromgenic photograph’ of an out of focus, leaf on a tree, advertised for $3700’ i.e Terri Weifenbach (see http://www.photoeye.com/gallery/form...allery=1&Page=) I am inclined to agree with his point of view that this type of pricing is outrageous but then again the price of art/photography is largely determined by what people are prepared to pay and in the case of Weifenbach have paid before. I do like some of his images but the bokeh on various others is hideous IMO. In relation to the image attached i would love to hear the story about this and how it is worth $1500!

    Anyway sorry I have not read the full article but thought I would comment on part of what I read.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails hmm...jpg  

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Italia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,680
    Sitting fee then $20 a print? Or $20 a print?

  6. #26
    David Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    near Dallas, TX USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,256
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicole Boenig-McGrade
    Which magazine?
    Lenswork
    David
    Taking pictures is easy. Making photographs is hard.

    http://www.behance.net/silverdarkroom
    http://silverdarkroom.wordpress.com

  7. #27
    esanford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Hertford North Carolina
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    637
    Images
    16
    There are a lot of good comments here. I've only read the beginning of the thread and not the entire article. But, to leave some of the emotion out of this, I think the first question should be considered: Do Photographers charge too "way" too much for their work. I think the obvious answer is that if someone is willing to pay the price, then it's not too much.

    What bothers me is that a lot of "no name" photographers will do a print and then stick a $350 price tag on it and expect people to buy it. Also, I just received my electronic version of "Photo Eye" Newsletter and there are Photographers pricing Giclee' prints for $750. Giclee' is just a fancy word for "another kind of ink jet print".

    I believe that photographers need to understand their market and where they fit; then they should price their work taking into consideration of all their costs, time and what their goals are. Anyone who is just getting out of the gate and believes that they are going to make a living in photography is probably deluding themselves. Another photographer who does high quality work and has exhibitions can charge more base upon the audience that follows him or her.

    Having said all of that, I am having my first exhibition beginning this Friday evening at a very small art gallery in this little country town where I live. I am showing 25 B&W gelatin silver prints (fiber based). These prints took many hours in the darkroom to print and they have all been fixed twiced and archivally washed for 1 1/2 hours. The mounting cost me $20.00 print (they are double matted). I bought black frames @ 10.00 each at the dreaded Walmart and framed them (they actually look nice). I am pricing each framed print at the gallery for $75.00. 33% of the sales go to the gallery as a part of a fund raiser. If any person orders prints beyond which I have at the gallery, the price will be $45.00 each for a mounted (unmatted) print on acid free museum board.

    Because I am a "no-name", I think this is fair.... Then again, I don't depend on photography for a living, and my main goal is to get some reaction to my work. What have others done in these circumstances????
    Often wrong, but never in doubt!

  8. #28
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    [QUOTE=esanford]

    What bothers me is that a lot of "no name" photographers will do a print and then stick a $350 price tag on it and expect people to buy it. ...

    Having said all of that, I am having my first exhibition beginning this Friday evening at a very small art gallery in this little country town where I live. I am showing 25 B&W gelatin silver prints (fiber based). These prints took many hours in the darkroom to print and they have all been fixed twice and archivally washed for 1 1/2 hours. The mounting cost me $20.00 print (they are double matted). I bought black frames @ 10.00 each at the dreaded Walmart and framed them (they actually look nice). I am pricing each framed print at the gallery for $75.00. 33% of the sales go to the gallery as a part of a fund raiser. QUOTE]

    As long as the principle of personal liberty applies, you can sell pictures for what you like. You probably do not need me to tell you that out of your $75 (no sales tax?), after the 33% has gone to a good cause, you have $50 left, minus the cost of mounting and framing this is $20, which most likely does not even cover the cost of your printing paper and chemicals (presumably in your hours in the darkroom, you got through quite a bit of paper). There is no allowance for your time, heat, power and water costs, the time it took you to frame the pix, and the time, gas, and parking charges it took you to get the pix to the gallery. Profit is not zero - it is heavily negative (aka a howling loss).
    On the other hand, taking the "shameful" sticker price of $350, half will probably go in gallery commission, leaving $175. If sales tax is payable (British VAT is 17.5%), this would take it down to $148. Allowing the same as you for matting and framing brings it to $118, translating to a profit of $85 if the seller were lucky. This is surely not an excessive amount to hope to earn for a couple of hours work (minimum) per print, even without allowance for the time required to take the picture in the first place, cost of film and processing, depreciation of equipment, automobile, etc?

  9. #29
    colrehogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Shooter
    Large Format Pan
    Posts
    2,016
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    16
    This is a timely thread. I am going to be putting up several prints (mounted, matted and framed) in a local show along with five other photographers during Feb/Mar and am wrestling with prices to put on the prints. At our meeting it was discussed that we charge the same amount per print, but this idea doesn't fly with me and I said so. I'm putting in mostly 8x10 pt/pd prints, while most of the others are doing digital prints made at a local pro lab. To me, there's quite a difference, even matted and framed.
    Diane

    Halak 41

  10. #30
    L Gebhardt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NH - Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,673
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    18
    I think Brooks Jensen has a very good point, but I think his price point is just too low. His main issue seems to be one oversized, but otherwise mundane, print that the photographer is asking $3500 for. As others have saind I can't sell my prints for $20 and even pay for expenses, unless I sell a ton of the same image. But I could be happy to sell them at $50 just for the print. At this point I tend to give away more than I sell so that wouldn't be too bad.

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin