| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/18/2009 01:10:46 PM · #1 |
When looking at fine art photography prints, it is possible to maximize revenues from an image by making available to both the fine art collectors market as well as the mass market, or do we have to pick one?
I look at famous paintings, and they have done it. Does the model work for the photography market?
And if we can access both markets, are there any recognized industry differentiators to distinguish the two products?
I'm discussing this with several galleries at the moment but am curious to hear the opinions of fellow DPCers too.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2009 01:17:10 PM · #2 |
The bottom line is if you decide to go the limited edition route, you better decide what you want from your image(s).
When they're sold, the revenue generating is done.
Generally, if you aren't selling your known name, there's no real advantage for trying to limit the production run because you cannot command the price of the known artists.
A picture from you or I of Yosemite is no big deal, no matter how stellar.......if it says Ansel, though.......8>)
|
|
|
|
09/18/2009 01:17:41 PM · #3 |
I don't know if it would work simultaneously, but I figure we have seen it happen plenty of times where a piece of work after its limited fine art run becomes available as a mass marketed piece of stock art?
But I think for it to work, the limited edition print would hvae to have somtehing that makes it limited. Like a special ink process or printed on a special paper, or something that would make it stand out, if that makes sense.
|
|
|
|
09/19/2009 02:33:55 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
When they're sold, the revenue generating is done. |
From that one image, I agree but the price of past works greatly influences the price of future works.
Originally posted by AJSullivan:
But I think for it to work, the limited edition print would hvae to have somtehing that makes it limited. Like a special ink process or printed on a special paper, or something that would make it stand out, if that makes sense. |
I guess that is exactly my question: For photography, what differentiation is needed / expected / standard for such a sales model to work without cannibalizing itself?
|
|
|
|
09/19/2009 02:48:59 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by AJSullivan:
But I think for it to work, the limited edition print would hvae to have somtehing that makes it limited. Like a special ink process or printed on a special paper, or something that would make it stand out, if that makes sense. |
I would think that the limited edition would have to be the largest available, and probably of better quality. They'd also have to be signed and numbered.
To avoid devaluing the limited edition, I'd think the reproductions would have to be a lot smaller, and probably prinmted by a mass process (e.g. offset) rather than as true phoptographs. Think an Ansel Adams signed 16x20 print in an edition of 100, reproduced as 5x7 greeting cards for the Sierra Club ...
I'm not sure there's really such a market for a limited edition these days anyway -- Adams (or his assistants) actually had to create each print by hand, while you can do your dodging and burning once and then make unlimited identical copies mechanically. These days a "limited edition" is limited only by the photographer's honesty in pledging to not make any more copies, and I think there's really no practical way to "destroy the negative" ... |
|
|
|
09/19/2009 02:56:07 PM · #6 |
The key thing is to identify what you are selling? Are you selling your images or are you selling images created by you? One tends to fetch a higher price as the other is nothing more than an abundant commodity. Answer that and the solution should be apparent.
Message edited by author 2009-09-19 15:19:57. |
|
|
|
09/19/2009 07:06:04 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by samchad:
When looking at fine art photography prints, it is possible to maximize revenues from an image by making available to both the fine art collectors market as well as the mass market, or do we have to pick one?
I look at famous paintings, and they have done it. Does the model work for the photography market?
And if we can access both markets, are there any recognized industry differentiators to distinguish the two products?
I'm discussing this with several galleries at the moment but am curious to hear the opinions of fellow DPCers too. |
Both options are certainly viable.
A hand made lithographic edition, using specialized technique & archival materials may have some advantage to intrinsic value higher than quickie prints from Walmart.
Among many, the University of New Mexico Tamarind Institute have opportunities for aspiring print-makers. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/10/2025 04:46:38 PM EDT.
