The Business of Art
To Reproduce
or Not to Reproduce
Heather Weiler
Lately
there has been a lot of talk in Salt Lake City about "art" and what role it
will play in the revitalization of Salt Lake City's downtown. While business
ventures have often thrived as a result of having the arts in their midst
it is, ironically, the artists who never seem to be able to make the business
of art thrive. With this in mind, I began a collaborative teaching project
at Riverton High School with the AP art program. Together with the art staff
-- mainly Robyn Harris and Susan Hyde --- I collaborate to teach a section
entitled, "The Business of Art." The purpose is to develop the concept that
"art" should be profitable, not only for the corporations, the financially
successful, and the gallery owners, but for the artists as well.
In collaborating with the AP Art course this year, I have been challenged
to examine the eternal question, "What is art?" and it’s companion question,
"What is fine art?" I believe a third question should be added to this theoretical
quandary -- "What is consumable art?" This question, to my knowledge, has
not been formally raised in the art curriculum. It is a crucial one, however,
because once an image is produced and goes from the artist to an outside
source, it has been consumed. The intellectual property remains with the
artist but the manifestation of that concept does not. So unless the artist
is to keep all his images, he must face realize that his art will be consumed
and must ask himself, “How?”
To Reproduce or Not to Reproduce
A strong myth has been perpetuated that suggests to reproduce one’s artwork detracts
from the original piece -- sell a reproduction and your retail value for
your original work will fall; better galleries won't carry you. Since museums
sell reproductions of all kinds and very high priced artists have selected
reproduction, I would suggest this argument is a moot point. Reproduction
is a personal choice. Often reproduction broadens an artist’s client-interest
base and actually increases the retail value price for the originals. The
reproduction can be the bread and butter product of consumption allowing
an artist to eat from the sale of one original to another!
The reason I am so in favor of reproduction is because it allows the public
to select an image from an artist and purchase it. The reproduction is about
buying something you like and want to enjoy. It is about a size that will
let you hang it in your personal space. It is about purchasing more than
one image and being able to hang them and still have money left over to do
other things. It allows the consumer to begin to consume at a level with
which he or she is comfortable. It is about not cutting out people who could
eventually decide to spend their money on an original.
I had a wonderful conversation with Bonnie Phillips recently and we both
believe the core is about building a consumer market. There are all levels
of consumers. I happen to believe that the introductory level may be consumption
of reproductions and then ease up the price point as the consumer becomes
more involved.
Taking the plunge to reproduce can be intimidating, both emotionally and
financially. After 16 years of marriage to an artist, having a brother and
sister-in-law, aunts, and cousins who ply their trade as artists, what I
know about reproduction is that IT IS NOT EASY and like marriage, "not to
be entered into lightly." But it also can be very rewarding both emotionally
and financially. I have financed poster runs, cards, and IRIS prints, as
well as lithographs. The following suggestions are based upon what I have
observed, experienced, and read. It is presented not as a "Bible" but merely
in hopes it will help you producers out there not to be consumed!
Choose Wisely
As I have met artists, both known and relatively obscure, one thing many
have in common is that at one time they looked into or have done reproductions.
Those who have reproduced most often did cards and posters. Just as often
they now store thousands of these in their basements or studios. Or sadly,
they sold the image to a publishing company and have received minimal reimbursement
but have the satisfaction of knowing their pieces are listed in a stock
image book. That is not to say that others have not hit the mark with just
the right image at just the right time and done well.
The first step in considering reproduction is to make certain you know
all your options. In order to understand which option is best for you as
an artist at any time in your career, you must know about the profit margins
for cards, posters, lithographs, serigraphs, and giclee. It is equally important
to know how much you have to spend on reproduction and the amount of time
you can afford to spend recouping the money you will spend on the reproductions.
This second factor is so critical because your profit margin is not just
the difference between the production cost and your sales price. It is also
the cost to distribute, store, and await reimbursement for the prints --
which can turn what seemed like a great deal into one you now keep as a deep
dark learning-curve secret. For some, this learning curve can be too costly.
Picking the image
This is without a doubt the most critical decision. Remember, your decision
is based upon consumption, not technique, personal appeal, or intrinsic meaning.
How often has the piece you love been your commercial bomb? That is not
the piece to select. My suggestion is TEST YOUR MARKET. You can do this
both formally and informally. Enter images in competition, show fellow artists,
show retailers, and publishers; get feedback from more than one source. Look
at what is out there, what is "hot" in the current media, what is selling
where. If you are painting desert themes, Hawaii may not be the place to
test your market strength!
Reproduction options
Once you have what you want to reproduce, you then have choices of reproduction
method. Look at your financial resources carefully. Also look at what you
will choose to have your image created upon. The quality of the reproduction
process should also be given consideration. The serigraph and IRIS giclee
prints set a high standard of reproduction quality. Both methods have an
upfront fee where the artist pays to have the original piece prepressed (or
prepared for the printing file). Then comes the production run.
Serigraphs have a large upfront fee for initial setup and volume production.
However the result is the "Rolls Royce" of prints, both for overall quality
and longevity. The IRIS giclee print has an upfront fee. The main advantage
with giclee printing is that, unlike serigraphs – where the number of prints
is selected, the run is made and the artist leaves with the entire edition
-- IRIS allows the artist to run (and pay) by the sheet. So if you
decide to run 500 printed images then you can decide to run just one sheet
at a time or ten or all 500. You pay for what you have run. The printer tracks
the sheets and the artist signs and numbers the edition pieces. The
nice thing about this process is that you can test market images before doing
an entire run. Again the result is a high quality print with longevity.
Lithographs, posters and cards have a large upfront fee and production
volume is best for larger quantities. Though overall per unit cost is less
than other options, the initial set up and production run cost can be high.
However you get a lot of prints!!!
Distribution
Distribution is the inevitable effect of printing. Now that you have prints, who is going to consume them? Will you be the distributor? Will you have "outlets"? Will you have a company buy the lot from you and sell them independently? Your answer can also determine the volume and quality of the print choice you make. Obviously the more you make, the more you have to sell! Be honest with yourself. If you are not a salesman then you will need outside outlets to sell for you. Some artists sell their own work at arts festivals, co-operative galleries, their own gallery, studio appointments, and the Internet. Others select agents who seek sales outlets for them.
editor's note: Heather Weiler's article "To Reproduce
or Not to Reproduce" is one in a series of articles we will be publishing
on marketing and reproducing fine art. In 2003 look for further "the business
of art" articles in the pages of 15 BYTES. For an article on giclee
printing visit our
February 2002 edition
.
|
Exhibitions Review -- Salt Lake City
December
Doldrums continued from page 1
 One of the most striking artists at the gallery is Brandon Cook, whose sweeping color forms have so much more to do with a love of paint than with the "landscape" references he frequently makes. A clump of trees, an indiscriminate foreground, and a hill and sky are what usually constitute the subject matter. I can't help but think that his paintings would be better off losing the "references" to concentrate on the paint with which he seems so intimate.
Kate Mooth is one artist who has left reference to go strictly abstract. Her carved out forms are a loose push and pull, floating blocks of color that collide within the confines of her canvases. She could well do with a show of her own.
By far the most exciting thing going on during the holidays is the one show that is not billing itself as a holiday show. Chroma Gallery, located in Sugarhouse, somewhat off the beaten path and not associated with the gallery stroll, bucked the trend of packed holiday shows, filled with small works perfect for consumption. Their exhibition, Size Matters, displays nine Utah artists, working in large and small formats. The premise of the show was to explore the importance of scale, with each artist providing a piece over four feet and another under six inches. I'm not sure the show is convincing that size matters, but the works certainly do.
Darryl Erdmann, who operates the gallery, paints colorful abstract pieces, which are stunning in and of themselves. The works take on a wholly unique quality because he paints them on stainless steel, leaving about twenty percent of the metal untouched as a sort of frame around the pieces. Their reflective quality gives the works a completely different nuance, whether he makes them four feet or six inch square.
Shawn Rossiter, who is displaying two sets of works for the show (one abstract the other landscape) falls into one of my pet peeves - the Janus-faced artist who just can't decide what he wants to do. The large landscape, a gray/mauve towering butte, is striking, as are the small landscape studies that accompany it. I generally like Rossiter's work and occasionally one of his landscapes can be quite beautiful, but when I see them next to a large abstract that seems to have nothing to do with his other work, I wonder if he really knows what he is trying to do. His abstract piece, a series of interlocking, aggressive black and white strokes, doesn't allow him to play with color, one of his stronger points. Unfortunately, it relies on an accompanying text explaining the significance of the title of the work to carry the piece. 
John Bell's pieces come the closest to showing how size - or at least number - matters. For his large piece, Bell has arranged 18 photographs shot at the Burning Man festival. Shown alone, a few of the pieces might have been interesting, but they only really make sense read together, as a collage of an experience of the festival.
Mark England's large graphite drawings and collage work are always interesting, though I notice that neither of his large pieces is recent. His smaller works - music boxes and nativity boxes -- are certainly charming.
The show as a whole may not have come completely together to fit the premise but the mix of works in the show - including Karl Pace, Trent Alvey, Andrew Smith, Holly Pendergast and Brad Slaugh - makes it one of the most interesting things I've seen in a long time. I must not have been alone, as the crowds of people who attended the opening over Thanksgiving weekend attest to.
In the end, I wonder if all these holiday shows are worth it. Do people even buy that much of the small art? People are actually out and about during the holidays, looking for things to do with family and friends. Their choices are the new Harry Potter, the Nutcracker for the umpteenth time or shopping in the packed malls. And all the visual art community gives them is one more mall experience. If at any time art can show its importance, it can do so when we are stuffed, overloaded and ready to burst from commercialism. For the holidays people need exhibitions not sales. People are looking for solace in art, not for one more gift option for Aunt Edna.
|
