Possibly an artist can keep ink jet prints high by agreeing to limit supply. After printing an agreed editions of prints, the image is erased. But how can buyers know for sure? I remember before Brett Weston died, he burned his negs. But digital image files can be flawlessly duplicated. During the 80s, photography wasn't considered art. Now it is. Are those against ink jet prints the same as those that rejected photography as art? Maybe people like me need to keep an open mind. History will tell if giclee prints will hold its value or not.