Rare and fair

I keep wondering whether the proliferation of prints put out by artists is confusing the art market. I would not want the original I buy to be replicated all over the place in prints in other people’s living rooms. If people are buying it for decor, then good, if the colors work. But if they are buying it for the art, why would they want something the neighbor could go online to get a print of?

Will the lonely emerging artist ever get a sale if much more professional art can be bought as a print? Even worse, if the print has been “enhanced” by the addition of real brush marks…something wrong here, to my way of thinking.

Well, if you need a Rothko, Dekooning or Pollock in your life, then maybe you need to really think about where you are. Let’s face it, it is paint squeezed out a tube and smeared on a canvas. These artists have become so branded on post cards, address books and umbrellas, so why would anyone want an original. And if 65 lost masterpieces by the three biggies suddenly arrive at auction and nobody suspects they are fake, then who is the BIGGER idiot, the buyer or the seller!
I fall into that category of new “doityourselfers” who have hung out a shingle on line. I have learned everything the hard way. And while it is my experience that the artist does more for the gallery than the gallery does for the artist (also, 90% of the money is made by 10% of the artists) galleries are NOT the answer. In this day people are far more savvy and seem to buy what they love as opposed to buy what they are told is important.
If you have a knack, then GREAT, but it is another 10,000 hours before the world starts to take notice. Currently, I am at 4998 hours and counting….@johnferrie.com

There is certainly more art out there then ever before but there are also more buyers including those that trust a gallery to display authentic work, those that surf the web, know the artist or find themselves waiting at a ferry parking lot for instance and buy something to remember their trip by.
This was my latest sale.
Knowing what Robert says about the market. I will stop painting lobsters and hope to switch to …. angus beef perhaps. However, I was never good at painting cows so I guess I’ll stick to throwing paint on canvas the way I do. I do believe art will always be admired and collected and how we get it out there may have to be rare and fair as well. Keep on painters, we have work to do! Jane

This sounds like a case of sour grapes to me. The internet is the way now, like it or not.

I am like John, I have learned the hard way. My experience has been that many galleries are owned by those who would not be able to recognize quality art if it came through their door. Some seem to have very little art understanding of what makes one work of art better than another. It seems to me that they are under the impression that if a work looks like similar to other work they have seen, then it is good art. Galleries that took the risk of hanging work that had never been seen became the first galleries to hang the great masters. Being a gallery owner is risky business and not for the novice or the faint of heart.
I would add that it is not only a saturation of art and do-it-yourself artists that have lowered the scarcity of art, or flooded the market, but it is also the lack of risk of the gallery owners to stand behind new and inventively, creative work. Most galleries I see have the same style of painters. The names of the painters change from gallery to gallery, but the same styles are repeated over and over ad nauseum.

Yes, but may the lobster check in and give his opinion? He may have been rare at one time and is plentiful now, but he is still fair: lobster (your art) has a sweet taste like nothing else and is individually a perfectly lovely crustacean; fresh steamed lobster, crack the shell, dip textured white meat in melted butter (painted well) … one of the finer dishes ever served to man.
Regardless of the cost at the dock or in a restaurant the lobster will always be what he is, either prolifically or not (keep painting). He doesn’t care how many other lobsters there are – he will be the best lobster (be the best painter you can be) he can be.
Fair is far more important than rare. Lobster won’t ever become as common as chicken but we all know even the lowly chicken can become an epicurean masterpiece in the hands of a great chef (painter).
Ask yourself if you never sell another painting would you still paint. Lobster will not stop being lobster if they never make it to the linen table cloth and china of a fine dining establishment.

One of the main problems I find with my galleries is that some of them are constantly bringing out artists who paint similar to me, are not quite as good, but are at a lower price. Fair?

Are you suggesting artists build in “rarity” into their work to make their art more commercially desirable and saleable? That is ridiculous and impossible. The vast majority of artists are derivative and lack originality. Artists who are “rare” are exactly that: few and far between. I do agree that these economic times have made it difficult for *all* artists to survive … both rare and ordinary, but suggesting that an artist build in rarity into their work is not the answer because it’s impossible.

Regarding the comment about the proliferation of prints destroying the art market: there are two sides to this coin. Some collectors may object to copies of an original they own hanging all over the place while other owners of original art work may find satisfaction that they own the original which might actually increase in value because of the copies/prints. The problem with art market right now has nothing to do with the proliferation of prints. In fact, I think prints offer another way for artists to reach a wider audience for their work at more affordable prices than an original. Prints can actually help the reputation and renown of an artist.

May I say again, John Ferrie (above) is probably the one who is most nearly right. He has made the same points on this page before and it still rings true. I have been painting and selling my art for over 50 years and now find myself somewhat uninterested in getting into what John has figured out. BUT, if I was younger I’d do my best to find out what he has done (I do know a little from this page and his internet offerings) and what he knows. This I’m sure of, he works hard at painting AND selling. If you’re younger than me and worried about your place in the art market, I think he has the answer.

Robert, you finally got ‘it’. It’s all about supply and demand. (I’ve been saying this to anyone who would listen for some time now). However, in your ending paragraph, you still stay “Working through reliable galleries tends to stabilize prices and manage availability.”

You’re still missing a very important point here. By far the greatest majority of artists will never obtain gallery representation, because there are fewer and fewer galleries, and most of them take on very few new artists every year.

What’s an artist to do? If you need the income to survive, get a job and paint in your free time. If you don’t, you’re one of the lucky ones, you can paint for yourself. Keep showing your work but learn to accept the new reality. There are too many lobsters out there and yours is just one of them. Sound cold? Yes, but it’s reality.

Well said. Anyone can make art these days and have more means to sell than ever before. When those greats created work, we were just over 3 billion people, that’s more than doubled today, including, probably the number of artists. And, the way that art is marketed, done and supported today is far different from anytime.
Artists do need to get their entrepreneur on! However, to succeed requires as much entrepreneurial skills and efforts doesn’t seem to be much of a discussion. What artist would ever spend 50% of their time building their sales efforts, marketing and administration of their work? Yet, that is what businesses do to keep their businesses viable; create the environment where work will sell.
Sure, lobsters are great food and tasty, but, when something is common, you ignore it. Like the anecdote of very early English settlers did in USA. Lobster so common it was used as fertilizer. Or that those same settlers starved because they didn’t recognize the food around them or that their agricultural practicers needed to be changed. Art isn’t an endangered species, it never will be. So, enjoy what you do and be ruthless… Even the ‘greats’ made crap, which we see at second rate shows all the time, but even that crap sells well because of name, branding, backstory and similiarly valued work. Cheers, Monika

Regarding Suzette’s second para above, I would say that by far the majority of artists will never attain gallery representation because they are not good enough. Raising quality should be an artist’s only aim. The rest takes care of itself.

Whatever happened to painting for the joy of painting? Perhaps artists could re-visit why they make art. Is it to earn a living or share the joy of their vision? The prices for works of art has put them out of reach for the average person who appreciate the art but can’t afford to purchase it. Works of art, IMHO, should be available to a wider audience; NOT made rare so that it garners high prices and lines the pockets of the sellers (which is rarely the artist).

What I call “The China Syndrome” is alive and well in my community in a large city in the US. Businesses, restaurants and local stores that hang lots of art are turning to artists and paintings from China. They express regret that they can’t use local art but say the Chinese paintings are much more affordable. How does one stay competitive in this new global Internet world?

Say what you will. Eating lobster is still a pain in the ass.

My partnership with galleries ended many years ago when I became a widow and did not wish to bestow 50% of the sales price on my gallery owner, tho’ he was the most sought-after in town. Instead, I worked at becoming more and more visible in the region, in addition to my six-hour a week teaching job, lasting 30 years! Eventually I got my work out through shows, loaning work to a trusted friend with a condominium in the heart of our city, showing at the art school where I teach. Local and regional museums bought my work, one sale quite recently. So you might say I became a big fish in a little pond – a conservative, midwestern city.

My work is figurative and involves the human condition altho the prevailing subject in this region is landscape.

I agree with what you are saying – in both letters – but one thing that seems to be missing is a discussion of quality. There is a lot of art out there for sure – but at what level?.

“When everything is art there is no art.” (unknown)

I have drawn and painted as long as I can remember, but was also fascinated by plants and animals. When I was a teenager, I had to make the difficult choice between art and science. I chose to become a research scientist, which lead to a fascinating career that ended with the cut-back of federal research in 1997. I had always continued painting with classes and workshops, so after the closure of my laboratory obtained a BFA degree at NSCAD university, starting my new career. I realise I have joined a new generation of older artists who are eager to follow their dream after years of making a living at something else. Thanks to our medical system we are fit and active and are not ready to sit and do nothing. Unfortunately, though, we add to the number of artists trying to make a living!

This week’s focus is followup on the truly fine recommendation that I find a proper ADAA dealer for my art sales. Your article mentions the wisdom of that move, just as my week’s tasks line up for attention – now that one will get priority.

This message rings true in my opinion. Sometimes I feel like I’m all over the place in my striving to be original. At a recent art show I displayed ” Forsythia”, oil on panel. I felt it was one of my paintings that reflected my true style, an original approach. It sold during that show, but at another art show this season I saw another work with the same look. Oh well.

It also boils down to “what the market will bear” or what can you get for a particular item at a particular time in a particular context of economy and culture. One town won’t pay what another city will.

As for lobsters, they are bottom feeders and feed on poop, which there obviously is a lot of nowadays, more than in the past.

Esoterica: My brother advised me not to eat the lobster around Peaks Island, Maine, because the Bush family’s island was right next door and the sewage went directly into the bay.

My mother saw my potential and drive when I was 12 years old and encouraged me to develop my talent. Now my work is in an art bank (it makes more money than I do in travelling art exhibits), I have a couple of published books of my illustrations with another poet (illustrators don’t get royalties) and I never really made it “big” in the art world as I thought I would. I don’t have a retirement package even though I ended up teaching art for over twenty years on my own and in a cultural arts centre…sigh, I am not rich, unsure of the future and so decidedly grateful for the life I’ve enjoyed, with all the angst and the pain and frustration and joy and love…sometimes money is not the answer to happiness and gratitude for what we have is better. Love to all of you, this crazy world and thanks to whatever that I can still be creative for now. Peace.

Art making is an avocation, not a vocation, as evidenced by the many famous artists who starved in their lifetimes, compelled to make their art regardless of the consequences. Those who care more about making money find something else to do.

Availability is the prolific artist’s curse. His speed and cleverness are contrary to principles of supply and demand. Better to be a dull, plodding, slow artist.

Time never sleeps. See the barn, paint the barn, sell the barn. Do it again and again. Live your own art life. I do. KAIZEN!!!!!

Before painting really became a career, I was a successful advertising creative, an art director and later creative director. One of the adages we knew well was that in bad economic times, it was easier to build a name and credentials for a client, provided he kept excelling at his work and promoted it wisely, honestly and fairly. The reason being that much of the advertising clutter would be diminished by people defensively saving the money.

Well I’m no longer an advertising creative. That door closed on me with a slam in 2008. But another door opened, and I am now happily painting like my life depends on it. It does, and I love it. I work hard at it and I can’t wait to see what I will have learned before I’m done. Along the way, I’ve picked up some really nice galleries in some really nice markets.

I’m not succeeding as people maybe did in the ‘good old days’, but I’m succeeding in a tough time. My message to those who wrote in would be to find a way. If I can do it, they certainly can too.

So here’s an idea, as a bronze sculptor I’ve always entertained the idea of doing limited editions of two or three million and raking in the bucks. As I’ve never really sold much anyway I’ve never cast more than one. But what if I market the fact I only make one-offs? Figure there’s any point to it? Love getting your letters

Not too concerned with the market, I paint what I think I would want, if I were buying art.

I went to a local art club show this weekend. It wasn’t too bad, but out of some fifty or sixty paintings all were done too often pictures that every art club member anywhere has done the same of dozens of times over. Two pieces I felt were unique.

Matisse, Picasso, Chagall, Renoir, Pollock, Warhol, yourself, Emily Carr, etc. are rare because of uniqueness.

I like your reasoned letters. I like that you are still, as you were in the seventies when visiting prisoners, giving of your knowledge to people so freely. You are an inspiration.

I have a BS in Business Management and Economics. While I’m not a world renowned expert, I have known the truths in the art world are just as you mentioned: There are millions of artists out there creating billions of works world wide, and the market is so very saturated. Some of the works are spectacular, some are good, but lots of it is mediocre and commonplace

Rare and Fair. Spot on.

Centuries ago, the materials for painting were VERY rare, the schools and the sponsorship for a talented apprentice to go were rare. Supply was ridiculously low.

Today, materials for painting are everywhere from Walmart to Jerry’s Artarama. Courses are cheap. Workshops are everywhere. People don’t apprentice under masters anymore…they are happy with just painting OK paintings.

There are those few who study, who practice, who are MENTORED by today’s good artists, and many go on to sell successfully.

Then there’s the rest of us. We’re ok. We don’t produce something ‘fair’, nor ‘rare’. We produce the commonplace, the hackneyed, the trite. We produce those works in piles and piles of canvas and panels and flood ebay and etsy and the local consignment shops with our OK / mediocre everyday works.

Fair and rare.

That is the key. A painting that is fair, done with quality, good design, good treatment, etc., is truly a rare thing. A painting that is expressed in a unique way is also rare.

Another artist told me, specifically about the plein air circuit, that there’s a lot of homogenous work being created today. This is so true. He was smart enough to see this and found a way to be UNIQUE with his works and to stand apart. Fair and rare.

This lesson today is spot on. I’m not sure many will get it. But for those that do, they increase their chances of at least knowing what they need to know to get to a better place as artists.

There are a lot of good artists out there that earn a living by other means, avoiding the dreaded “starving artist” syndrome.

I liked your newsletter article, Robert. Thank you. I am saddened by the number of artists claiming there is so much “bad” art out there. The arts are from the unconscious, the soul, if you will. To be creative is to be a happier, more content, and calmer. So what if everyone isn’t DiVinci? We paint because we must. My work improves every year as I learn more. I suspect the same is/was true about those complaining about “bad art.” I also live in a place that won’t support high priced works. So I price what the local market will bear. What I sell it for is not a measure of it’s worth. It simply, bad or good, spoke to someone. That is a joy. We should criticize others’ works less, and spend more time enjoying creating.

Take heart everyone. While it’s true there are more artists these days, there are more buyers as well. Regardless, enjoy the creative process because it’s a beautiful gift. Paint what you love, the rest will follow.
Cheers!

Good on you, Anonymous. You’re exactly right. If I could, I’d call you by name.

What a nice surprise to get those live lobsters Mr Genn. (At end of featured comments above) Too bad though about what happened. Maybe you could write something about beef and arouse some of your friends in Alberta.

To Mike Barr- Finally someone who has stated verbally what I’ve been saying for years and have been crucified because of it. Notably – “Everyone is painting the same landscaped”-sic
I have gotten so much- not quite hate mail from saying this that I realized I had better stop saying it. So many are trying to “fit in” and deliberately paint in the manner of what is popular ,that in the process have lost their individuality (if they had any to begin with)
When I demonstrate, I always start off with a list of Do’s and Dont’s.
Near the top of this list is: Don’t paint someone’s elses picture. Don’ t paint the painting you saw last week in a magazine. See life through your own eyes.
It was a surprise and a pleasure to read your comments and know I am not alone in my thinking. Thank You.

“BS baffles brains.” Intellectual, greedy people are the easiest to fool.

Back in “the day,” artists had patrons that kept them from starving too badly in the garrett. Nowadays, in America at least, artists have pensions, another type of patron. Or, I guess you could say, they are their own patrons. Honestly, sometimes I think I’ll scream if I read another bio that says, “After I retired from xx a lucrative career with a great pension system xx I fulfilled my dream of being an artist.”

Since the Google revolution people are much more informed and aware. Since the shiftiness and dishonesty of the broader Internet, they are also more cautious and suspicious. This is why so many are now taking the burden of making up their minds onto their selves.

I also paint lobsters , but like eating them better,I live at a Chester seaside cottage, and paint the lobster boats out in front of our cottage.

In 17th Century New England, apparently indentured servants’ contracts in seacoast areas would contain clauses that said they were not to be fed lobster more than 5 or so days/week. Lobsters were apparently easy protein; after a storm one went down to the beach and picked them up from the high tide line. Then they got fished out enough so they had to be trapped and became a luxury food – in part because of the dreadful weather men in small boats without motors had to brave to haul their traps. Now there are motorized boats, easily-bought traps, and the high prices lured too many people out to fish lobsters and governments kept using licenses long after the market was saturated. So here we are, back near when they were a glut on the table. We turn out too many paintings, too fast, and perhaps before we have put in our 10,000 hours of practice (see Malcolm Gladwell’s The Outliers) and become good enough to catch attention without gimmicks or new styles. Some of us need to Go to Our Rooms again…which is what I am doing, and it seems to be paying off.

Even the “Greats” created mediocre art along the way, we just don’t see it in museums. Monet painted, and sold, many inferior works in his time to make a living. After achieving success, he bought back those paintings and destroyed them.

When we read about the likes of Ann Freedman and how she was duped it brings to mind the countless brokers at Lehman Brothers who willingly jumped on the bandwagon selling stuff they only suspected but did nothing about. The lesson we all take from this is that the big boys (and girls) are being more closely watched. I hope the trend continues and we don’t get complacent again.