Let's discuss the value.... - DPChallenge Forums

08/12/2007 10:49:42 PM · #1

....of an image.

If you were to sell an image, to the general public, say at a flee market, would you sell that same image to a gallery for the same price?

What is the value of a unique image?

What is the value of your artistic endevor?

If you don't believe in the value of your art, will others?

If you overprice your images, will others see it as price gouging, or will people see your images as high priced pieces of art?

What is the value of a photographic image from an artistic point of view?

TooCool

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

08/12/2007 10:58:47 PM · #2

Originally posted by Man_Called_Horse:

....of an image.

If you were to sell an image, to the general public, say at a flee market, would you sell that same image to a gallery for the same price?

I wouldn't put the same presentation in both forums... In the flea market I would tend to put a s**tload of post card sized images. At a gallery it would be the biggest or best presented (spelled framed and matted) version of my image. You present to your audience...

Originally posted by Man_Called_Horse:

What is the value of a unique image?

Priceless

Originally posted by Man_Called_Horse:

What is the value of your artistic endevor?

I don't have an answer to this as I'm highly biased AND I'm my own worst critic...

Originally posted by Man_Called_Horse:

If you don't believe in the value of your art, will others?

No.

Originally posted by Man_Called_Horse:

If you overprice your images, will others see it as price gouging, or will people see your images as high priced pieces of art?

In which venue?

Originally posted by Man_Called_Horse:

What is the value of a photographic image from an artistic point of view?

Am I alive still or dead?

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

08/12/2007 11:11:28 PM · #3

What is "worth" compared to "value"?

idnic

Canon EOS-60D

08/12/2007 11:31:02 PM · #4

Basic economiccs - supply and demand. If someone wants something and it is not common in the marketplace it demands a higher price. If there is one on every corner it cheapens the value. Photographically, if we offer something that is uncommon, and it is desired, its value increases.

08/13/2007 06:14:45 AM · #5

Originally posted by idnic:

But, the average man or woman on the street may want to only pay $5 bucks for an image that a gallery, or museum may want to pay $5 million for.

How does supply and demand come into effect now?

why is the image worth five bucks to some, and millions to others?

08/13/2007 06:37:39 AM · #6

This is an interesting topic.

If you have recently been to an art gallery you might see images that are worth millions and then pick up a postcard of that very same image for a few pennies.

Valuing an item can be a very difficult thing to do. The ultimate valuation is the maximum price that someone will pay for it. As with the art gallery example, the same image can have very many price points depending on the packaging that comes with it: artistâ��s hand printed original vs giclee print vs postcard etc etc.

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Nikon

08/13/2007 10:28:25 AM · #7

How then is a photographer to value the worth of their art?

If they are not confident, then they may under value thier art.

If they over charge for their art, then they will have alot of overhead to pay for.

Where does the worth of the artist become equal to the value of the art?

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

08/13/2007 10:30:21 AM · #8

There's a real distinction between the information that is the image and the object that might be a specific instance of the image.

People pay more for rarity, size, difficultly of materials, touch of the original artist during printing and so on.

The postcard vs gallery print distinction is almost entirely one of the value of the object, not the value of the image.

levyj413

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

08/13/2007 10:50:45 AM · #9

I think this is one area where supply and demand don't follow the usual rules. There are some luxury items that people want more because they cost more. Some just want the most expensive stuff. Others think that a high price means it must be worth more. Luxury cars, for example. Sure, maybe leather seats and a couple of extra features should cost more. But $80,000 vs. $20,000? Nah. Lexus and BMW and Mercedes are selling prestige, not just cars.

I think art is like that. "Welcome to our dinner party. Have you seen my new ? I picked it up at auction for only $20,000. What a steal!"

I've seen stuff in galleries I wouldn't pay $1 for. For some of it, I can at least understand that it could be called art. Other stuff just looks like trash to me. I don't mean "trashy," I mean literally stuff pulled out of a garbage can. But some gallery owner declared it worth a lot of money. And if the owner and artist can convince someone to part with the cash, then good for them.

So if you want to sell photos for lots of money, it seems to me you need to find a gallery owner willing to tack a big price tag on it.

I know I sound like I'm mocking the system, and I guess I am to some extent. But really, I think I'm agreeing with the original post, too - put a price tag on it that at least meets your needs, whether they're financial, ego stroking, etc.

This is why I just raised the prices of my prints on DPC Prints by a lot. I decided it wasn't worth it to collect $5 for a print. I wasn't selling many at that price anyway. So now, if someone sees a $100 price tag, maybe they'll think the price indicates it's worth that. And if I manage to sell even one, it's 20 times as much as I would've made.

08/13/2007 10:52:21 AM · #10

Originally posted by Man_Called_Horse:

I agree that pricing is very difficult. On a personal scale, until you have sold some images there will be no market in your images by which you can assess the appropriate price for new images. One lesson from history is that the artist rarely receives the full benefit of any value attributed to their art: often images are bought cheaply at the time and only gain serious value many years after the artistâ��s death when the level of scarcity becomes finite.

On a practical level, the only way to test whether your sale price is correct is by trying to sell your images. If they sell too quickly, put up your prices. If they are not selling, put your prices down. See what the market will bear â�� if you cannot sell them at a profitable level, find another jobâ�¦!

On a conceptual level, the worthiness of an image can be divorced from its profitability (to take another genre, there are plenty of â��worthyâ�� writers who write impenetrable and clever prose but will never sell as well as Michael Crichton or Barbara Cartland). This kind of worth is only ever fond in the criticâ��s eyes, and is an influence but not the arbiter of financial value.

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Nikon

08/13/2007 11:39:27 AM · #11

Incidentally, it may be of interest that the Artist's resale right regulations 2006 have come into effect in the UK (and similar rights apply across the EU) whereby a proportion of any resale price is paid to the artist - reflecting the way that artists are paid a small amount by initial buyers but their images are often traded at much higher values soon thereafter.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

08/13/2007 11:50:24 AM · #12

Originally posted by Matthew:

Do the artists have to refund the buyer a percentage if their work is later sold for a lesser value ?

levyj413

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

08/13/2007 11:59:18 AM · #13

Originally posted by Matthew:

That's very interesting, but nearly impossible to enforce, I'd think. Is there a minimum initial sale or later sale price before this is triggered?

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

08/13/2007 12:05:17 PM · #14

Originally posted by levyj413:

That's very interesting, but nearly impossible to enforce, I'd think. Is there a minimum initial sale or later sale price before this is triggered?

It only applies to images costing over EUR 1k, capped at max fees of EUR 12,500, as sold through art galleries and dealerships (not privately). The low limit reflects the desire to benefit poorer artists whose work might transfer for smaller amounts (it was initially EUR 10k) and enforcement is through audit of dealers.

While it made a bit of news in 2006 when introduced, I haven't heard much since so assume that it is quietly working (or quietly not working)!

Elmakias

Canon EOS-5D

08/13/2007 12:06:11 PM · #15

Skyarcher

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

08/13/2007 03:00:22 PM · #16

Originally posted by levyj413:

I agree with you on this Jeff. There is stuff out there that I look at and think, what the heck were they thinking, was it "Oh, let me put crap up here, people are suckers and will go for it?"? I mean, come on. Yet, it sells, and for high price. Amazes me how some will pay bookuu bucks for garbage, yet never think to give to charity or someone who needs help. Well, at least not without the fanfare of accolades because they had to announce what they were doing, instead of just doing it. But that goes back to the old saying about beauty lying in the eye of the beholder. I see crap, someone else sees beauty. Go figure. ;)

As far as value and worth. Hmmm, to me, I will probably always value something higher and think it worth more, simply because I know what was happening at the time I made the image. I do nature photography, so my emotions are more involved, for me, sometimes than other types of photography. Not always, I've seen street photography or photojournalistic images that just grab my heart. To me that is how I place worth on an image. Does it touch me, emotionally, logically or maybe negatively(which is really emotionally)?

So, does the worth of the artist ever equal the value of the art? Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, sometimes it even surpasses it.