fine art prints

Film Photography & Darkroom discussion

Moderator: Keith Tapscott.

pirateoversixty
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Peoria, Illinois

fine art prints

Postby pirateoversixty » Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:18 pm

Was just wondering how digital generated images are selling in the galleries versus traditional film and wet darkroom images. Anyone got a feel for this?
Jim


Fotohuis
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:25 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Re: fine art prints

Postby Fotohuis » Sun Nov 27, 2011 4:33 am

There are only a very few people who want to pay the extra money for a real fiber/baryta photo print. Concerning the amount of work which is involved to get a good fiber print means it never can be a cheap photo at all.

BTW it's very difficult at all to make money with a good photo print (independing it's printing in a digital way or even analogue.)
"De enige beperking in je fotografie ben je zelf"

http://www.FotohuisRoVo.nl
http://gallery.fotohuisrovo.nl/

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Salon prints

Postby Ornello » Tue Nov 29, 2011 12:30 pm

Not sure how much market there is for salon/gallery/nature photography. I doubt very much outside of major cities, and then only for 'big names'. Most people pay money for wedding photographs and portraits, not photographs of rocks and trees. The book market is there, to some extent, for that sort of photography, but I would never buy a book of photographs of rocks and trees, no matter how well done they are. I have bought books by Sebastião Salgado, in fact several of them.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&saf ... 80&bih=847

pirateoversixty
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Peoria, Illinois

Re: fine art prints

Postby pirateoversixty » Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:01 pm

maybe my question is premature. I will post it again in twenty years, when photos made with digital cameras and printed digitally, will have had time to "mature", so to speak. my reference was to prints from the likes of the westons, st. ansel, eugene adams, and so forth.
Jim.

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: fine art prints

Postby Keith Tapscott. » Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:12 pm

pirateoversixty wrote:Was just wondering how digital generated images are selling in the galleries versus traditional film and wet darkroom images. Anyone got a feel for this?
Jim
I'm not certain about this, but I suspect that digital prints probably outsell silver gelatin prints.
A serious collector (connoisseur?) of B&W prints might only ever want to buy archival processed and finished traditional silver prints.

The actual subject matter of the photograph is down to a personal liking by the individuals who buy them.

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: fine art prints

Postby Ornello » Thu Dec 08, 2011 4:47 pm

I still don't think there is much of a market for original prints other than those of the 'big names' (Weston, Adams, etc.). Books are much more practical. The collector's market for prints is much smaller than the market for books.

foolscape
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:01 am
Location: Portland, Oregon
Contact:

Re: fine art prints

Postby foolscape » Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:38 pm

Really, if there is one thing I leaned by reading the writings of Ansel Adams (and about him written by others), as well as about any artist or photographer, it's that those who are tireless self-promoters sell the most prints. That's how Weston, Adams, and Steiglitz got to be who they were. They got into galleries and museums by force of will as much as skill. The same goes for today's photographers. If more digital printing photographers are pushing themselves into galleries, then more digital prints will be sold. I don't know if the buying market (as small as it is) cares much anymore. About Weston, Adams, et al's prints, most by them on sale these days have been printed by people hired to emulate the original artist's prints. They don't command the price, nor the long-term value of the originals. This probably doesn't actually answer the question, since I really don't know much about the art market. I just thought I'd add a practical point about self-promotion.

--Gary

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: fine art prints

Postby Ornello » Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:24 pm

foolscape wrote:Really, if there is one thing I leaned by reading the writings of Ansel Adams (and about him written by others), as well as about any artist or photographer, it's that those who are tireless self-promoters sell the most prints. That's how Weston, Adams, and Steiglitz got to be who they were. They got into galleries and museums by force of will as much as skill. The same goes for today's photographers. If more digital printing photographers are pushing themselves into galleries, then more digital prints will be sold. I don't know if the buying market (as small as it is) cares much anymore. About Weston, Adams, et al's prints, most by them on sale these days have been printed by people hired to emulate the original artist's prints. They don't command the price, nor the long-term value of the originals. This probably doesn't actually answer the question, since I really don't know much about the art market. I just thought I'd add a practical point about self-promotion.

--Gary
Yes, promotion is important. I saw yesterday, at a small used camera shop, a large print for sale in the area reserved for prints for sale. The composition was abysmal, a small group of people very far in the distance walking under some trees. They were so small you could hardly see them, and they were facing away (taken with a short lens, probably a wide-angle or normal-length lens). They were placed dead center in the frame. In other words, it was rank beginner's work. I can only surmise that the print was there because the author was aggressive.

I have no idea what possesses such individuals to exhibit and try to sell their work. Before someone goes 'showing off' and exhibiting, the work has to be good.

I like to see people close-up and facing me:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/62 ... otostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/62 ... otostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... otostream/

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: fine art prints

Postby Keith Tapscott. » Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:34 pm

foolscape wrote: If more digital printing photographers are pushing themselves into galleries, then more digital prints will be sold. I don't know if the buying market (as small as it is) cares much anymore.

About Weston, Adams, et al's prints, most by them on sale these days have been printed by people hired to emulate the original artist's prints. They don't command the price, nor the long-term value of the originals.

This probably doesn't actually answer the question, since I really don't know much about the art market. I just thought I'd add a practical point about self-promotion.

--Gary
Some collectors might not care about how a print was produced, but I do and I would insist that a B&W photo that I liked (whoever the photographer may be) was produced by traditional methods, but I am only speaking for myself on that point.
I have no interest in buying digital monochrome images and that's why I didn't renew my subscription with Black & White Photography (UK magazine) when it expired. The magazine is almost about 100% digital-imaging now.

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: fine art prints

Postby Ornello » Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:41 pm

Keith Tapscott. wrote:
foolscape wrote: If more digital printing photographers are pushing themselves into galleries, then more digital prints will be sold. I don't know if the buying market (as small as it is) cares much anymore.

About Weston, Adams, et al's prints, most by them on sale these days have been printed by people hired to emulate the original artist's prints. They don't command the price, nor the long-term value of the originals.

This probably doesn't actually answer the question, since I really don't know much about the art market. I just thought I'd add a practical point about self-promotion.

--Gary
Some collectors might not care about how a print was produced, but I do and I would insist that a B&W photo that I liked (whoever the photographer may be) was produced by traditional methods, but I am only speaking for myself on that point.
I have no interest in buying digital monochrome images and that's why I didn't renew my subscription with Black & White Photography (UK magazine) when it expired. The magazine is almost about 100% digital-imaging now.
Yeah, I have looked at it (the UK mag) a few times, but I don't see the point, really.

foolscape
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:01 am
Location: Portland, Oregon
Contact:

Re: fine art prints

Postby foolscape » Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:18 pm

While we're on the subject of personal preferences, I'd like to add a few "dittos" to the previous few posts. Most of what passes for photography that I've seen recently in galleries, both physical and virtual, is pointless. Notice that I said "most," because there's some good stuff out there as well. But, there's a lot of blurry, badly composed, boring, amaturish work out there masquerading as pro photography. What ever happened to beauty as an ideal? What ever happened to compositional techniques and dynamics. I understand the urge to "paint outside the frame" as it were, because an art form can get shackled by its own dogma, but there is a point at which it becomes like navel gazing. Also, being a whiz at Photoshop does not mean that one is a good photographer.

--Gary
Ornello wrote: Yeah, I have looked at it (the UK mag) a few times, but I don't see the point, really.

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: fine art prints

Postby Ornello » Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:51 pm

foolscape wrote:While we're on the subject of personal preferences, I'd like to add a few "dittos" to the previous few posts. Most of what passes for photography that I've seen recently in galleries, both physical and virtual, is pointless. Notice that I said "most," because there's some good stuff out there as well. But, there's a lot of blurry, badly composed, boring, amaturish work out there masquerading as pro photography. What ever happened to beauty as an ideal? What ever happened to compositional techniques and dynamics. I understand the urge to "paint outside the frame" as it were, because an art form can get shackled by its own dogma, but there is a point at which it becomes like navel gazing. Also, being a whiz at Photoshop does not mean that one is a good photographer.

--Gary
Ornello wrote: Yeah, I have looked at it (the UK mag) a few times, but I don't see the point, really.

Well a lot of good ol' boys are selling their pickups and buying a nice digital outfit and calling themselves pros. Most have little or no training in composition, lighting, or posing, but some do take seminars on various topics.

Crafts tend to go through stages. When it is new and difficult, and requires some physical strength strong, bold men are involved.

http://www.originalwoodsculptures.com/wood/museum.//jpg//

After it becomes somewhat easier, the dilettantes start getting involved.

http://static.photo.net/attachments/bbo ... 123184.//jpg//

In the final stages, when it becomes very easy, come the women.

http://image.shutterstock.com/display_p ... 084827.//jpg//

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: fine art prints

Postby Keith Tapscott. » Fri Dec 23, 2011 11:54 am

Ornello wrote:
http://www.originalwoodsculptures.com/w ... um.////jpg////

After it becomes somewhat easier, the dilettantes start getting involved.

http://static.photo.net/attachments/bbo ... 84.////jpg////

In the final stages, when it becomes very easy, come the women.

http://image.shutterstock.com/display_p ... 27.////jpg////
I couldn't get these links to work for me.

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: fine art prints

Postby Ornello » Fri Dec 23, 2011 9:40 pm

Keith Tapscott. wrote:
Ornello wrote:
http://www.originalwoodsculptures.com/w ... /////jpg//////

After it becomes somewhat easier, the dilettantes start getting involved.

http://static.photo.net/attachments/bbo ... /////jpg//////

In the final stages, when it becomes very easy, come the women.

http://image.shutterstock.com/display_p ... /////jpg//////
I couldn't get these links to work for me.
That's weird.

Dean Taylor
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:38 am

Re: fine art prints

Postby Dean Taylor » Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:51 am

@ornello

from a student:

please provide the technical data--i.e., camera, lens, film, developer, etc.--for the first image you've posted (lad with dreadlocks carrying Rubik's cube).

thank you

Dean Taylor

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/62 ... otostream/

marvelous shot!


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests