Art Print Issues by Barney Davey

Selling Art Prints - Exploring Open Edition Print Opportunities

Ideas to Sell More Art Prints

(Ed. note. This post is republished with permission from the October issue of Art World News magazine.

In the September issue of Art World News, I began this series with a brief review of art print market history recognizing the success of artists and publishers in both open and limited edition prints. This month we will look at how using open editions in today’s market can benefit artists.

Don't Jump Off a Winner

To be clear, I do not advocate abandoning limited editions for artists and publishers who have success with the model. As the country saying goes, “Dance with the one that brung ya.” Surely, limited editions will remain as a valid marketing model in the print market.

POD Changed Everything

The emergence of print-on-demand (POD) technology forever changed the art print market, just as it has the music, film, and book publishing businesses. Other coinciding developments, including affordable small business e-commerce solutions, the influence of social media, the quick acceptance by consumers to buying online, the rise of Big Box retailing, and the flood of imports, combined to drive change to breakneck speeds.

Change Is Not Going to Come, It's Here. Learn to Deal with It!

Inevitably, change creates pitfalls and opportunities. How your art business fares depends on your ability to recognize and respond to the changes. Keeping what works, leaving behind what is broken, and leveraging new opportunities are your keys to succeeding in chaotic times.

Change Creates Chaos & Opportunity

Today, artists have affordable technology to create a delivery system to market to buyers predisposed to buy direct from the artist. Because of uncertainty in traditional markets’ ability to endure, I urge developing these direct marketing channels for independent artists. The tools and knowledge are there for artists who want to manage their careers and dictate how their work gets to market. For many independent artists, selling direct is the future.

Nevertheless, some successful galleries and publishers continue to enforce exclusivity on the artists they represent. If artists are comfortable with such conditions, they should try to make the traditional system work for them because there are examples of artists who continue to enjoy success in traditional markets. Still, it’s a smart idea to keep weighing opportunities.

Sheer Numbers of Visual Artists Versus Galleries & Publishers Demands Direct Marketing

The reality is the large number of visual artists versus the declining number of publishers and galleries dictates most artists need to build profitable direct distribution channels to succeed. Fortunately, independent artists have access to affordable, powerful tools and a wealth of knowledge to help them build a successful career.

It is reasonable for artists want to earn a decent living from the result of their labor. A way for some is to avoid artificially capping their income by exclusively marketing their digital fine art prints as limited editions. Open editions provide the means to broadening their collector base in the mass market, and the opportunity for beloved images to sell well for decades.

Open Edition Prints Have a Rich History with Major Artists

In my new e-book, How to Price Digital Fine Art Prints, the prolific and profound art business author, Daniel Grant, says this about pricing limited editions and open editions:

“Pricing, again, is based on demand. One would presume that works from a limited edition should be more expensive than those from an open edition. Still, Ansel Adams' most famous photograph, "Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico, 1041," was an open edition, and he printed new versions over a period of decades. Prices for these works have stayed high, because of the attraction to this image and the connection to the artist”

Does Your Art Marketing Cater to the New Breed of Art Buyers?

It appears a new breed of art buyer is developing. One who prefers choice, convenience and high quality, as opposed to being forced to buy a fine art print with no say in size or substrate. With a growing image library of 3,000 images, the success of the ArtThatFits.com site, which is owned by picture framing giant Larson-Juhl, caters to such buyer tastes.

The bottom line is if the art is powerful and reproduced in the highest level then it can be marketed to those who might be called art buyers, as opposed to art collectors. While in both limited and open editions, the primary desire is to own the image, the secondary buying choice for “art buyers” is based on quality, convenience and variety.

Today's Art Buyers Are Being Underserved from POD's Potential

Until POD evolved, buyers with these needs could not be served and, as such, were never identified or developed.  Steve Jobs' magic at Apple was creating hot products, not by asking what consumers wanted, but rather by developing accessible technology to fill previous unmet needs. Once buyers realized how cool iPods, iPhones and iPads were, they were hooked. I think today’s art print market greatly underutilizes the full marketing capacity of POD in printmaking.

Granted, art buyers who want quality and convenience are different from collectors who will only buy limited edition prints. Instead of annoying these collectors with established preferences for limited editions by attempting to convert them, the suggestion is to market to buyers who will pay premium prices for high quality work, but prefer the options offered in open editions prints.

Knowing the Distinction Between Buyer Types Is Crucial

Consumers have great access to information, and most have near photo quality digital desktop printers. As such, they know giclées, produced by top digital print ateliers, can be faithfully reproduced as high-end digital prints with no limits. Given the circumstances it seems obvious that consumer behavior is moving towards high quality open editions, especially if they are buying online. Removing the burden of limited edition provenance and the risk of being duped has to simplify the decision and increase sales.

Fine Art Photographers Are Finding Open Editions Profitable

Jeffrey Stoner is a leading fine art photographer who has read my books and blog for many years. He was influenced by my thoughts and decided to work in open editions. He recently contacted me to with results from that decision. The following comments from him were originally posted on my ArtPrintIssues.com blog:

"Your writings about limited versus open edition prints were one of the deciding factors in my choice to go to open prints in 2007.  It was the right decision for me.

I began a series of Angora Goat images in 2008.  There are now five in the series. The goats are part of a 10-year experiment to control the growth of Canadian blackberry bushes on the open balds.

The balds are treeless mountain tops and are found at 5800’ along the Appalachian Trail on the Tennessee / North Carolina border.  The goats are brought up to the mountain top on the first day of summer and back down the last day of summer.

The series, which I made in 2008, took off with the first goat image (Arlo shown here.) He became my best selling image of all time in just 9 months after being published. If I had limited the sales of this, and succeeding, goat images, I would have lost a lot of income. And, Arlo is still a big hit. One gallery owner jokes that sales of Arlo prints will pay for my retirement.”

Do You Recognize the Hidden Costs in Publishing Limited Editions?

Other things to note about limited editions are the hidden costs involved. The artist or publisher has to establish a system for tracking every limited edition. For a prolific artist, this can become an arduous task. There are laws in 14 states regarding limited editions. New York and California are considered the most stringent. Artists legally need to comply even if they are selling via the Internet from another state. The burden of time-consuming, costly, extra bookkeeping is eliminated with open editions.

Arthur Secunda Proved You Can Have It All!

The renowned artist, Arthur Secunda, has been shown in leading galleries and museums worldwide. He also had a successful poster printing run with Haddad’s Fine Arts. He was known to express his poster sales helped pay for his studio in France and grow awareness for his work. It didn’t ruin the career of Pablo Picasso when he had a successful open edition print series sold in Sears’s stores in the 1950s.

Terry Redlin is one of the most revered Americana genre artists of any generation. He has huge museum that is a major tourist attraction in his home state of South Dakota. During his career,  he has sold both open and limited editions of the images. Some of his images were dissected and sold as smaller images. None of this has dissuaded his collector base. Although he officially retired a few years ago, collectors still flock to the museum and continue to buy editions of existing images.

Creating An Ethical Means to Sell Both Limited & Open Editions Is Possible

Last month, I suggested artists could produce a numbered limited edition of 100 in one size and one substrate hand-embellished by the artist. At the same time, lower grade open edition prints of the same image could be marketed. The key to success here is to be fully transparent by operating one’s business with integrity and honesty. If buyers know the facts, they won’t feel duped about what they are buying. And, those with a collector mentality can still get a precious limited. And, smaller editions are easier to manage on the back end and more likely to succeed on the fickle secondary market.

In the End, It's What You Make of It. You Determine Your Success

Like the art market in general, the art print business is personal, subject to change and difficult to grasp at times. What works for some artists is suicidal for others. While not every artist has the heartstrings appeal of Terry Redlin’s work, all can take lessons from what worked so well for him.

What it comes down to for artists is the need to research, to be introspective, so you know what works best for you. You have to be willing to try new things and equally willing to give up on them if they don’t work out. Ultimately, the decisions about open versus limited editions can only be made by the artist. It is your life. You have to decide what is best for you and your career.  When you are comfortable with those decisions, you can plan a course of action to achieve your goals with dignity, integrity and great results.

Exploring Open Edition Art Print Market Opportunities

Art World News Reports on the Fine Art Print Market

The article here is reprinted with permission from the September issue of Art World News. The publication is must reading for visual artists, fine art photographers, art publishers and galleries. This is the first of two articles I wrote on the subject of how artists can benefit from working with open edition prints.

---

Exploring Open Edition Art Print Market Opportunities

Reviewing the history the art print market reveals its growth has been fueled by both limited edition and open edition prints. In recent decades, the market divided into camps of limited edition and open edition print publishing models.

Whole cottage industries of art print publishers matured around one model or the other. When managed properly, both models have proven to be successful. This is due to mainstream art buyers rarely favoring one model to the exclusion of the other. Such openness fueled opportunities for both limited and open edition print business models.

Limited editions were borne from necessity.

When the first prints were made, printing techniques forced small print runs. For instance, because etching plates degrade with each press pass, only a small number of high quality prints are possible. The practice of numbering prints was a natural evolution. Art sellers instinctively realized numbered limited editions created a powerful marketing tool, one still used in modern fine art print marketing.

Although there are no limitations to producing very high quality digital prints, many artists and publishers, who have grown their business with limited edition prints, continue to use them to market gicleés. It is easy to understand why these marketers reject upsetting a profitable working model to move into open edition prints. Nevertheless, there are untapped prospects for them in the open edition market.

Massive Change Creates Chaos and Opportunity

Changes in the art print market over the past decade mirror other industries. Major factors include worsening economic conditions, changes in both wholesale distribution and consumer buying habits. Big box retailing, foreign imports, and the growth of e-commerce with its comparative shopping power and purchasing ease compounded the deviations. The speed of changes and widespread acceptance to them completes a picture of chaotic market disruption.

Changes such as these have closed the doors on old business practices while creating new ones. The swift shuttering of 135-year old Decor magazine and its once dominant Decor Expo Atlanta tradeshow is a prime example of how quickly a business can become irrelevant and obsolete. On the upside, artists and publishers are finding new ways to use the significant advantages of print-on-demand (POD) technology, social media, online galleries, personal websites, blogs and more to create new marketing opportunities.  

Print-on-demand Technology Forever Altered the Music, Book Publishing, Film and Art Industries

Smart art marketers use POD technology to meet consumer demands as never before. Although adopting the idea of offering open editions that come in multiple sizes has not come easily to some limited edition art publishers and galleries, it’s time they take note. The future is calling.

The success of Artaissance.com, a publishing company owned by picture framing manufacturing and distribution giant, Larson-Juhl, demonstrates how to take full advantage of POD technology. It encourages buyers to choose canvas or paper. Artaissance understands the importance to buyers of being able to order their art in the size they need to fit their unique spaces. This is a consumer benefit and sales and marketing opportunity rolled together. It’s no surprise the company uses www.ArtThatFits.com to promote its offerings.

Many of Our Most Revered Artists Have Leveraged the Art Print Market

There is a rich history of artists whose works made the case for the open edition print market long before the advent of digital printing. Imagine how the estates of such print market giants as Maxfield Parrish and Ansel Adams would have suffered, as would have millions of their art buying fans, had either chosen to sell strictly limited editions of their images.

The huge success of Art.com verifies art can effectively be sold via e-commerce. Since its business model is nearly all open editions, it also proves strong buyer demand for them. Interestingly, if you research top selling prints on Art.com, you find a mix of classic works by artists such as Van Gogh, Picasso and Monet along with contemporary pieces. This illustrates the interest in quality, both old and new and eclectic buyer tastes.

It's About the Art - Open and Limited Editions Both Sell Well

These observations confirm that quality compelling work, whether old or new, and whether an open or a limited edition, can always find a market. And, they further demonstrate consumers are less concerned about open versus limited editions than wanting to own and live with an image special to them. Limited edition digital prints are not driven by consumer demand. While limiteds offer sales support in a closing room, it is the art itself, whether original, limited or open edition that brings buyers and sellers together.

The achievements of Jen Bekman’s 20x200.com limited edition print online gallery attests to efficacy of the limited edition model.  An April 12, 2010 article on the FastCompany.com website reports, “Since its launch, 20x200 has sold more than 65,000 prints by both emerging and established artists, and in 2009, 20x200 received $885,000 in funding in a Series A round led by True Ventures.”

Marketing Decisions Are Personal Business Decisions Only the Artist Can Make

These are impressive results, especially given recalcitrant market conditions. Such success aside, the question remains whether the site’s accomplishments come at the expense of profits left on the table for those artists whose work would sell well for years to come in open editions.

Given there is ample evidence of potential success with both limited and open edition models, artists frequently ask if they can use the same image both ways. There is no consensus about this question. It’s an ongoing debate leading to a personal decision only the artist can make.

Why Should Visual Artists Be Saddled with a Business Model That Limits Their Income?

I believe visual artists should not be forced to accept artificial caps on the potential income from their works. There is no model in any of the other arts where artists’ works are limited. You don’t find it in films, books, music or theatre. Nor is there any “sold out” backlash when a book, film, or record sells millions of copies. Visual artists should not have artificially imposed limitations on their income when more profitable options are available.

Given digital printing dominates the print market, and has no constraints on endlessly producing pristine reproductions, the idea of using only limited edition digital prints seems arcane and not the best model for the print market in the 21^st Century. I believe artists can succeed with the same image in both limited and open edition prints, if done with honesty, integrity and transparency.

A Workable Model to Sell Both Open and Limited Edition Fine Art Prints

A limited edition of 100 prints in one size on one substrate, hand-embellished by the artist is suggested. This would serve gallery or collector demand for limited editions with full disclosure about open editions. Such an exclusive edition would create a collectible print edition and potential secondary market for the image.

Open editions of the same image could then be offered on a variety of substrates and sizes. They would be of stated lesser quality than the limited edition. Because there are no industry standards on how to manage such practices, artists and publishers need to be transparent with their actions, including publicly posting notices of their publishing practices. 

Reputation Management is the Key to Success Building Repeat Buyers.

How a publisher or artist manages providing full disclosure to all buyers of availability of both limited and open editions is crucial. Treating your buyers, prospective buyers, galleries and dealers with honesty, integrity, and consistency is how to succeed in the print market with open and limited editions.

Savvy consumers have easily available powerful research resources, leaving no room for shabby marketing practices. By the same token, if artists conduct their business in a way that exudes high quality and high integrity, they can build a business model that will allow them to profitably sell their images in both open and limited edition markets without losing sleep or collectors.

A second part to this series will appear next month. It will cover how open editions can affect an artist’s career and legacy. Readers will learn about the hidden costs in limited editions, and get details on artists who have had success being in both limited and open edition print markets.

Limited Edition Prints Versus Open Edition Prints - More Perspectives

When it comes to digital fine art giclee prints, readers who follow this blog know I hold strong opinions about using open editions for marketing them.

There is no single solution on the open vs. limited edition debate.

It's not that I am against tradition. It's more that I believe the arguments for using open editions outweigh those for continuing to use them.

I also am the first to admit there is no 100% solution for all artists. How could there be when there is ample evidence there are many artists who continue to effectively market their fine art giclee prints.

There are believable points and great examples to support both sides of the debate.

In recent days, I have been reminded about how some artists are doing well in open editions while others are profiting from limiting editions. Here is a note from fine art photographer, Jeffrey Stoner. He is a long-time follower, friend and supporter.

"Your writings about limited vs. open edition prints were one of the deciding factors in my choice to go to open prints in 2007.  It was definitely the right decision.

I began a series of Angora Goat images in 2008.  There are now five in the series. The goats are part of a 10-year experiment to control the growth of Canadian blackberry bushes on the open balds.

The balds are treeless mountain tops and the one they are on is at 5800’ along the Appalachian Trail on the Tennessee / North Carolina border.  The goats are brought to the mountain top on the first day of summer and come back down the last day of summer.

 The series took off and the first goat image (Arlo) which I made in 2008 was my best selling image of all time with 9 months. If I had limited the sales of this, and succeeding, goat images I would have lost a lot of income. 

And, Arlo is still a big hit. One gallery owner jokes that Arlo will pay for my retirement. I've included shots of Arlo from 2008 and Nash from 2010.  I’m working on the 2011 edition to the herd." — Jeffrey Stoner

The other side of the coin has compelling rational to it

I had a long chat with Roger Laudy, the CEO and mastermind behind Image Wizards the other day. His company is the premier provider of fine art and fine art photography printed on aluminum. The results for the right images are nothing short of spectacular. Roger listened intently as I laid out my argument for why I believe in open editions:

• I'm an artist advocate and I don't believe artist should have to arbitrarily cap their income by limiting how many copies of their work get sold.
• I believe most collectors will buy open editions as freely as limited, or that the upside on the open will exceed the loss on the limited.
• In an age of digital printing where even lightly informed buyers understand there are no actual limitation to possible number of prints produced, it seems somewhat disingenuous to be selling limited editions.
• I have more the argument, you can read about it in this post, The Double Entendre of the Visual Artist Selling Out Redux, or get more perspective on any of the posts here.

Roger is in touch on a regular basis with some very successful fine artists and fine art photographers. He made the powerful point that his best customers, those who place the most frequent orders, nearly all sell their work in limited editions.

He gave me the example of the fabulous oceanic photographer, Marc Montocchio who has a limited edition print on metal of a live marlin in its natural habitat in the ocean.

This is a one-of-a-kind piece. He is selling a very limited edition run of the image, and stands to make a boodle doing it. You can view the YouTube video on how the image was taken here.

Ultimately, every artist will come to his or her own conclusion

So, I get it. I can look at artists like Ford Smith, Jennifer Vranes, Yuroz and countless more who are profiting in the limited edition market. It proves it is not an open and shut case. My only retort to such overwhelming evidence of success is to question how much money those artists lose by capping their income.

The heirs of Maxfield Parrish and Ansel Adams continue to get royalties from their estates. If these artists had opted for limited editions of their work. The income from those original prints would have long ago dried up.

The open edition print versus limited print debate is ongoing and likely to never be resolved

I'll leave it at that. As always, I know you will come to your own informed decision. Two competing ideas that are both wildly successful are Art That Fits, a company owned by Larson-Juhl, the world's largest supplier of picture frame moulding and supplies. It is notably owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway group. Art buyers can browse its site and order open edition prints in a variey of sizes.

The other is Jen Bekman's 20x200.com site that sells very limited editions. It has enjoyed VC investments in the millions. She is proving the argument for limited edition prints. And, the debate goes on... and on.

P.S. If you live in the U.S., you can order a free sample kit from Image Wizards. International orders pay a small shipping fee to have the samples sent to them.

How to Sell Fine Art Giclee Prints - An Art Career Success Webinar

Art Print Market Expert Barney Davey Presents a Live Art Print Career Webinar Sponsored by Xanadu Gallery

As a visual artist, you can learn to successfully create and sell reproductions of your original artwork as fine art giclee prints on canvas, paper, and other digital art print substrates.

The plentiful benefits for visual artists who create a successful art print market career include:

• Increased awareness for you and your work.
• Getting paid multiple times from the your original artwork.
• Diversifying your price points.
• Broadening your product line.
• Gaining entry to the lucrative licensing field.
• Selling art into the home furnishing, hospitality, corporate and healthcare markets.

For Some Artists, Marketing Limited Edition Giclees Makes Dollars and Sense

In the art business, when it comes to the subject of limited edition giclée prints, there are those who feel as strongly about using them as I do about not. While I remain opposed to the practice for most artists, I fully understand the argument for using limited edition prints from those who rely on them to complete their business.

I do not wish for my opinions on not limiting giclee prints to stand in the way of anyone who is being successful, or to deter them from doing those things that help them get to market. Rather, I applaud those who make it work. Certainly, history shows there are innumerable successful visual artists who exclusively market their work using limited editions. Still, I believe there is a better way today.

A year ago, I wrote a post titled Five Opposing Thoughts on an Art Career. and used a famous quote from F. Scott Fitzgerald to illuminate it. I find the same quote apropos to today’s post. And, once again, with apologies to F. Scott Fitzgerald, I offer you this thought:

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. One should, for example, be able to see that things are hopeless yet be determined to make them otherwise.
~ F. Scott Fitzgerald

To be clear, while I have not softened my stance on using marketing giclees, or digital fine art reproductions, as open editions, I merely welcome other voices. To that end, I have summarized a thoughtful insightful retort regarding my posts on this subject and present it to you here.

The reply comes from one of the industry’s most well regarded giclee printers, Gary T. Kerr of Fine Art Impressions LLC in Davidson, North Carolina. Let me know if you have your own opinions to add to this lively conversation.

---

Hi Barney,

I am always in alignment with you on your writings, but this one I would like to influence you on as follows:

We have a case study where one of my artists sold a giclee for $33,000. It has a 10 page contract stating how the buyer can hang the piece and that they have licensed only one hanging position and that the other 3 ways it can hang are considered derivative uses and not allowed. The artist attends the installation of these diptychs which are 10 x 16 feet. Now comes the edition issue... these prints are editions of 13. Question, do you think the buyer would write the check for $33,000 in these were "open" editions?

Galleries drive the decision to use limited edition giclees

The facts are it is galleries that have pushed us toward limited, not our artists. The galleries want "exclusivity." I agree it is a coercion of value. But in this world of marketing, they (galleries) need some sales pitch for the floor, limited editions have given them that hook (albeit a weak hook today).

Regarding later made prints being better... Not necessarily so, not in the vast majority of cases. This is due to the fact that the quality of a reproduction stems from the capture process not the quality of wide format printer technology. Files coming out of our studio can be printed on a $99 inkjet from Officemax and blow away many marketplace prints. That's because our capture process is second to none -- I've got the magazine articles and white papers to prove that (but I'm sure you already know).

The pace of progress on improvements in digital fine art printing has slowed

I also think we are seeing the end of era with pushing printer improvements. Getting more ink channels, DPI, and color gamut is not happening at the pace of 5 years ago. Although improvements will be made, it will be at a far more gradual pace and meaningless when it comes to improving quality greatly. The quality of my prints has barely changed in 10 years! And we have been through every generation of printer technology here. Why? Because the capture determines 90% of the quality, not the printer make and model.

And if you have all the latest gear and the artist doesn't like what they see, who cares how good the printer technology is! The music is in the pianist, not the piano. I have the same set of golf clubs as Tiger Woods, how come I'm not in the PGA?

Again, I always find your articles and blog amazingly accurate and informative, but my response today should provide some nuance that only the guy doing it for a living may see -- hope you can reasonably parse my view.

---

My reply went like this:

Hi Gary,

Thank you for your informative reply. In my estimation, by virtue of your stellar reputation, you are one of the premier master giclée printmakers in the industry. As such, your thoughts carry great weight with me.

I am not the Pope of Prints

The one thing I am not is the Pope of Prints, which means I am far from infallible when it comes to my opinions. While I make my case for open editions, I also realize there are many who still use limited editions as a viable way of getting to market and making a living at it too.

As is the case in the art business, there is no one size fits all formula for making a booming career. In the many years I worked for Decor magazine, I marveled at how top selling artists could approach their marketing in vastly different ways and still manage to be successful.

Of course, I realize the collector who bought a $33,000 limited edition giclée would not have ponied up such a princely sum for an open edition. One can only imagine if the print sells for that price that the artist’s originals are well in six figures. These price points make the exception, not the norm. I would not expect any artist who commands such prices taking much interest or heed in my advice or opinions. It is emerging and mid-career artists who are most likely to benefit by following my advice. If an artist is already established, they most likely have their very strong opinions about open vs. limited editions.

Championing Unlimited Editions Is Foremost a Financial Decision

To my way of thinking, most artists will make more money from prints in the course of their career if they offer them in open editions. That is the rationale for my pressing the case of open edition prints. I want artists to be more successful and make more money. If they can be more profitable in the long run by selling more open than limited edition prints, then printers, reps and galleries also will benefit in the success.

There are those rare artists, such as with Terry Redlin, who are able to print open, limited, and mega-editions and make it all work. But, like your artist mentioned above, Terry Redlin is beyond the pale for most artists who might try to approximate the success he has enjoyed. He was there at a time when limited editions on paper were sold in the thousands upon thousands.

A New Era Calls for New Ways to Do Business

Terry Redlin's heyday of selling 10,000+ editions is a bygone era. Today, we are dealing with a new paradigm and new market realities. The trade publications and shows are on life support. Galleries are struggling to meet the new challenges coming at them from all sides, and artists are trying to figure out what they need to reliably get their work to market and keep their sales repetitive in the process. If there ever was a time to shake up the status quo, it would be now.

With your permission, I would like to publish your email as a guest post on my blog to make your case. I always will welcome a differing perspective on important issues and think it would be healthy if others chimed in as well.

Getting more voices in the conversation can only enrich the process and make everyone think a little harder about how to utilize this wonderful print-on-demand technology to advance the careers of visual artists. Not just at the cash register, but with respect towards how they and their legacy will be perceived by their actions and decisions to employ fine art reproductions in their business.

Related posts:

Milton Glaser Post Goes Viral - A Lesson for Not Limiting Giclees

The Case for Open Edition Digital Prints - Part Two

The Case for Open Edition Digital Prints - Part Two

This piece started out as a reply to the comments on my previous post, Milton Glaser Post Goes Viral - A Lesson for Not Limiting Editions.

When I realized it was more than a couple of thoughts or a quick reply, I decided to publish it as its own post so more readers would see it.

So here goes with more thoughts on why I am against limiting digital fine art prints.

Thanks to Alan, Maria and Daniel for commenting here. Alan, I'm glad you agree. Maria, yes, I am advocating against limited editions of digital fine art prints, aka giclees. I totally agree with your husband, Drew. Other than marketing gimmick, there is no justification for limited edition giclee prints.

It is not always easy to take an unpopular or controversial stand on an issue, especially when those pitted against you really get the knickers in a knot. However, I believe this issue is too important to ignore and will continue to champion open edition digital prints because in the long run every body involved will do better as this way of thinking gains traction. The change is underway, it is not whether, but when limited editions of giclees becomes passe.

Limited editions arose out of necessity

That necessity became a tradition in the art business. Now some dealers and artists have it in their head it makes their art "more elite" or "more marketable" or "more collectible." REALLY? Do the research. For every limited edition that makes it to the secondary market and sells for greater prices than originally offered, there are thousands of limited editions that never sell out. Why bother?

Do you know you have to comply with the laws of 14 states when you sell limited editions, including sales made over the internet? Who needs that for something you might otherwise be able to sell many more of at a slightly reduced price without the bookkeeping headaches of managing limited editions. This extra bookkeeping is annoying and is a hidden cost that puts a drag on the profitability of print marketing.

Buyers buy art they like, not limited editions

I believe most art buyers make the purchase decision on the fact they want to live with the art in their home or work place and that being limited is not a huge buying factor. I also believe there are many dealer and galleries addicted to the notion without realizing it is costing them money in the long run. Does anyone believe consumers are not fully aware that digital prints can be reproduced endlessly and perfectly? Then why in the 21st Century are we trying to pull the wool over their eyes with limited editions?

You can still sequentially number open editions

If you want to number them, fine. Just don't limit them. I believe there would be some prints that were open edition, but numbered, that would still find the lower numbers collectible. If you look at the crazy things that are in plentiful supply, but numbered somehow, and how the lower numbers are worth more, it says it all about the collector's mentality. Low number license plates in Delaware go for half a million. Does that make sense when you can get a brand new one for rack rates? No, but collectors don't care.

Give your buyers what they want

One of the greatest advantages, besides no inventory, to giclees is they can be made to order to suit the customer. This is a first for the art business and the industry has not picked up on the fact more art would be sold if you allowed people to order the size they want. We are completely missing a huge opportunity to fill the needs of buyers in ways never before possible, and it is easy.

Show me any other art form that artificially limits how many will be sold. You would laugh at recording artist who limited sales to 1,000 copies of their CD, or film makers who only let 10,000 people see a film, or a Broadway play that closed in two weeks when the demand for tickets was still high. Yet, this is exactly what artists do when they artificially limit the number of pieces of their work.

What if Maxfield Parrish only sold 1,000 copies of Daybreak?

Other than blindly sticking to hidebound tradition and being fearful of not being capable of getting good prices for open editions, is there any viable reason for dealers and artists not to favor open editions? What if Maxfield Parrish or Ansel Adams had put all their works into only limited editions? Can you even imagine what a loss to mass culture and art appreciation that would have been?

I can understand an artist creating a limited edition of a print that is also open with the difference being the piece was handworked by the artist after the printing. In such a case, the artist would probably not want to make more than a 100 or so prints that way. This would be a way to make a small limited edition that makes sense and is worthy of the effort. And, can be done without sacrificing the ability to sell open editions of the same image.

This brings up A/Ps (Artists' Proofs) for digital prints. What the heck is that about? A way to jack up the price on a more limited edition of the same print? If limiting giclee is a gimmick, then A/Ps take the notion to another level. It flies in the face of the original idea which was that the first prints off the press, which traditionally are Artist Proofs, would be the crispest with the greatest fidelity before the plates wore down, and thus more valuable. Explain how that works with digital prints.

Later made digital prints should be better than the first ones

This brings me to Daniel's excellent observation about improving and changing images to make them better. I have argued his point before as well. That is, digital printmaking is an evolving art form. It is most likely that by the time an artist makes the same print in the thousands, or for years to come that the process to make them will be better. Improved printers, substrates, dyes, inks and software help printmakers to continue to turn out better reproductions than the first in the batch. Not to mention the improved skills of the printmaker, too.

This evolving situation turns the whole notion of A/Ps upside down when later prints stand a greater chance of being better than the first. We are living in different times. Consumer tastes are changing, we need to keep up with or be in front of their desires. I don't see how limited edition digital fine art reproductions fit into the equation when the demand is for authenticity and transparency with a potential backlash against anything that doesn't meet those standards.

Limited editions limit the income of the entire pipeline

Why should artists, dealers, galleries and printers be forced to shut off their income stream when a print with viral potential gets shelved because we are beholden to an antiquated form of marketing that doesn't make sense for anyone?

I believe a well-made compelling great image can be sold as an open edition at a fair price that approximates what the price of a limited edition would be. Anyone who doesn't believe this is possible is not selling on the value of the artist and the work, but is instead selling on some perceived notion of  exclusivity and implied potential future value. Any truly good art salesperson should be able to easily transition to selling this way with no real loss of volume or income.

Things are different now and they are not going back - Time to get with it

It seems to me if those who continue to rely on these outdated tactics are going to have an increasingly difficult time in the future. It was not that long ago that many people in the industry thought giclees and digital prints were the worst thing that happened to the business. Turns out print-on-demand was one of the best things in the past 100 years for the business. It's time now to move so the marketing of this wonderful technology catches up with the benefits the technical development have brought us.

What Is the Secondary Art Market?

In order to address the question of what constitutes the secondary fine art market, you must first know what makes the primary art market. The answer, as with many things in the broad art market, is complicated. Since the broad secondary art market includes very expensive work by contemporary masters to relatively inexpensive four-color offset lithographs, you will find the terminology is used differently depending on circumstances.

The essence of a primary sale is the first transaction where art is sold, in most cases. However, complexities arise when you study the distribution chain.

It is simple when a deal is made between artist and collector. The situation is less clear when an artist makes a wholesale sale to a gallery that then offers the work at full retail. In this instance, the retail transaction made by the gallery is considered the primary market transaction. Of course, there are other methods of first sale to consider.

Defining a secondary market sale

A secondary market sale occurs when the original buyer decides to put the work for sale a second time. Whereas this sale is most often initiated by a collector seeking to sell the work, there are cases when a gallery will put pieces directly into the secondary market. This usually not good because it means the gallery has too much inventory and too little demand for the work. No gallery is going to sell through the secondary market when it has buyers for pieces in the primary market.

The venues for the secondary art market range from the toniest auction houses and private dealers to established brokers and galleries all the way down to eBay. In November 2009, The Economist ran a piece titled “New or Secondhand?” that accurately depicted the upper end of the market. The information and concepts the article discusses do not apply to most readers here. Alan Bamberger has an useful illustrative article, "Retail Gallery Prices May be More Than Art is Worth," on his ArtBusiness.com Website.

The art print market is divided

For our purposes, we are here to discuss the secondary art market as it pertains to the art print market that includes selling reproductions as prints. In the art business, there is a bifurcation in the print market. That is, there are those fine art prints made in time-honored fashion which, by the nature of their creation, are limited. These would include etchings, woodcuts, aquatints, engravings, serigraphs, stone lithographs and so forth. See Wikipedia for more details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printmaking.

The other component of the print market primarily is made up of reproductions of original art. Some would call this the decorative art market, while others reserve that term for the open edition and poster market. How you describe it has as much to do with what end of the market you derive your income as anything.

If you are an artist, dealer or collector involved with etchings, your view of a giclée is likely to be a decorative reproduction. On the other hand, if you make your living selling giclees, or some other form or fine art reproductions, you may take issue with your work being called decorative art. Unfortunately, you can only control how you market your work.

Different processes create different perspectives

If you study the work and promotional information offered over the years by artists and galleries at the New York ArtExpo, I doubt you would find one exhibitor characterizing their work as decorative art – especially those who sell limited editions. It completely natural they would use descriptions designed to help sell their work.

The International Fine Print Dealers Association (IFPDA) also holds an annual show in Manhattan. You will find this small, but important, group of dealers generally eschews representing much of the work found at shows such as ArtExpo New York. Most will contend, as Kathryn Markel does on her Website, that the work found there is “wall decor."

While not stating wall decor is necessarily a bad thing, dealers, such as Kathryn Markel, would not encourage buyers to participate in paying the set prices for much of the higher priced work at ArtExpo. Their reasons are the works primarily are reproductions and that much of it these days is digital art. And, there you have the bifurcation in the art print market.

The diminishing secondary art market

When it comes to the secondary market, there is an active market for many artists whose work is found at shows such as ArtExpo New York. You will also find many other artists whose work has transcended the "wall decor" mentality. In other words, it is a mixed bag. Arguably, the best example of a secondary market player is Art Brokerage. It carries a huge selection of work from a wide range of artists, including many who have exhibited at ArtExpo over the years and many others who have never set foot inside it.

There is an implication that art reaching the secondary market will have appreciated in value having become more collectible along the way. For some artists, this is accurate, but for the few who enjoy seeing their art selling well above initial prices, finding an active secondary market for most is not a reality, especially in their lifetime. It is one of the reasons I have argued for not having limited editions of fine art digital reproductions.

There is a bit of a conundrum here

In today’s market, if an artist is productive and continues to put new editions in the market place, it tends to lower the resale of earlier pieces. Although in the boom years of limited editions prints, this dynamic was not always the case, and is not now for select artists. If artists combats the problem of lowered prices on the secondary market with small editions, of say 200 or less, they cap their income for that work and need to either generate higher and higher prices for their new work or put more editions in the pipeline to maintain a steady income, both actions have consequences.

Should artists be paid a resale royalty?

When it comes to the secondary market, artists do not participate in the inflated prices. Only California has droit de suite laws where artists are legally ensured a cut of the proceeds when it is resold in the state. The legislation is known as the California Resale Royalty Act. This type of law is more common in European Union countries. I doubt they will ever move beyond the borders of California.

Until the past few years, you could go to the back of Art Business News or Art World News and find several pages of small ads from dealers in the secondary art market. In a very telling sign of the times, those publications are today much smaller in overall ad pages and secondary market ads have nearly vanished. Coincidentally, in another telling sign, if you research art prints, particularly giclée prints on the sites of secondary market art brokers, you will find many pieces being offered well below their original price.

In the art business, more than secondary market is hurting

Another factor in the market that has diminished with trade magazine ad pages are secondary art market  Websites offering works while having very little inventory. Attorney, Joshua Kaufman, a long time columnist for Art Business News, wrote, “The Online Secondary Market: Resource or Parasite?” It is an informative piece detailing how some rouges operators business methods were having a negative effect on the market place. It also warned that much of the way they were operating was illegal.

While we like to think it was the industry policing itself that drove many of them out of the market, it was eroding market and economic conditions that took away their incentive. What remains to be seen for the industry is whether the market will return to a point where artists using the giclée medium will see an active market with rising prices for their work on the secondary market.

Where is the print market headed?

My estimation is it will be very difficult for the market to bring us back to the old days of a booming profitable secondary art market for several reasons. First, most artists working in multiple these days are using the giclée or digital printing format. I do not believe the public clamors for limited edition giclées. I think it would rather pay a little less and get to enjoy the art. This notion is supported by evidence some longtime publishers in the giclée market are moving away from creating limited editions in this market. Lastly, once there is a widespread established pattern of digital prints not increasing in value, it will be very difficult to reverse such a trend.

This may be a market with a beautiful creative product, but it also a business that follows trends. If the trend grows stronger to open editions, it will depress the secondary market for fine art print reproductions. That is not all bad. I think it will force the art to be sold for its enjoyment rather than the implied notion it will increase in value. Buyers of giclees found before the current economic crunch they could not recover close to the sale price of prints they bought when they tried to take them back to galleries, sell them on eBay, or through an art broker. Things surely have not improved in recent years.

How should an artist thinking about getting into the print market proceed?

I think giclees are a wonderful medium to help sell more work. Rather than looking to maximize the sale of a limited edition, I suggest keeping the edition open. There is no reason the pieces cannot still be numbered using your own open numbering convention. If the artist’s work does become collectible, then the lower numbers will likely have some higher than retail secondary market value.

For those who feel a need for limited editions, I would consider producing a small edition of 200 or less that is hand-embellished by the artist. I believe if it is clearly stated the edition will be accompanied by lower-priced open edition pieces, there would not be conflict with buyers. Certainly, recently retired artist, Terry Redlin, was able for decades to sell both open and limited editions of the same images without creating a problem for his self-publishing company or the dealers who carried his work. I am guessing and would suggest that in such a situation the limited edition have exclusive dimensions.

---

Milton Glaser Documentary Premiers May 22: Register to win a poster or book!

Register to win a Milton Glaser Poster or book from Art Print Issues (Ed. note, the drawing has concluded and the winners notified)

For many, Milton Glaser is the personification of American graphic design.  Best known for co-founding New York Magazine and the enduring I ♥ NY campaign, the full breadth of Glaser’s remarkable artistic output is revealed in this documentary portrait, MILTON GLASER: TO INFORM AND DELIGHT.  From newspapers and magazine designs, to interior spaces, logos, and brand identities, to his celebrated prints, drawings, posters and paintings, the documentary offers audiences a much richer appreciation for one of the great modern renaissance men.

Artfully directed by first time filmmaker Wendy Keys, the film glances into everyday moments of Glaser’s personal life and captures his immense warmth and humanity, and the boundless depth of his intelligence and creativity.

The documentary premiere is set for May 22. Look for it at an arthouse theatre near you. You are certain to be delighted. 

Last year, I wrote a post reprinting, with Mr. Glaser's kind permission, his iconic 10 Things I Have Learned. To help illustrate the post, he kindly provided a marvelous image titled The Secret of Art. It neatly showcases his  eye and elegance, and his wit and wisdom.

Register to win a Milton Glaser poster like the one above or or a copy of his book, Drawing Is Thinking from Art Print Issues (ed. note The drawing closed and the winners have been notified.)

In honor of the film premiere, and to help raise awareness for it, we are conducting a no-obligation raffle where you will have the chance to win a poster like the one above or a copy of Drawing is Thinking.

 

The rules are simple.

• To register, follow this link and enter your name and email address.
• All entries will be placed in a spreadsheet. A random number generator will be used to determine the winners.
• Winners will need to provide a valid USPS address for free shipping. 
• Multiple entries, duplicate names and email addresses will be disqualified.
• The drawing will take place on May 31.
• Winners will be annouced here and notified by email in early June.

Visual Artist Entrepreneur Seizing Opportunity

Do you blog? Do you post frequently? If so, where do you get your ideas for topics? I don't have a method for finding topics,most of them find me.

I always try to stay open to opportunity. To do that, I read lots of things completely unrelated to the art business. My previous post about using the Ferrari model of selling limited editions of its $600,000 Enzo model is an example. It provided a spark of an idea that could just as easily be applied to the art print market despite the obvious price differences.

Besides finding inspiration in odd places, I usually have a few ideas for posts cogitating and rumbling around my brain and my other brain all of the time. Sometimes they are just waiting for the right stimulus to provoke the post. Such is the case today. My friend Mike Geraghty was one of the first to purchase my book. It was through the book and my newsletter that our friendship evolved into mutual admiration. Enough to survive agreeing to disagree about politics.

I have had the idea to write about Mike's intrepid adventure into another facet of the print market for some time. Alyson Stanfield's recent post, which mentioned a NYTimes.com story, Lucrative Art Careers, on her Art Biz Blog lit the fire for today's post. Alyson is having a BIG SALE on her I'd Rather Be In the Studio book with a whole bunch of freebies good only until December 21. Check out the image on the right sidebar for more details.

Mike is an extraordinarily gifted painter. He is an avid sportsman as well. Hailing from the Baltimore area, site of the Triple Crown's famous Preakness, he gravitated to painting thoroughbreds. You can see his work at his www.ipaintchampions.com Web site. Some say faces or hands are the hardest to draw and paint. But, there is plenty of argument for the degree of difficulty in painting horses as being the hardest. Put them in motion if you want to up the ante. However you come down on that debate, there is no denying Mike's obvious talent.

To say Mike is a smart guy is a given. He did after all jump on my book early on. In the book, I talk about unsung artists who have managed to carve out a successful career selling a steady stream of art prints, but outside of the spotlight that shines on such artists as Thomas Kinkade, Wyland, Robert Bateman, et cetera. Mike is that quintessential artist. Turning out the work, finding his own markets and managing nearly every aspect of his business singlehandedly. My hat is off to him for his success and perseverance.

Mike is an artist entrepreneur who keeps an open mind and looks to seize opportunity when he sees it. A few years ago, he encountered Andy Moursund, who owned a bookstore in a nearby Washington DC suburb. As a hobby, Andy had built up a collection of vintage college football posters. He had a developed a sideline business of inexpensively reproducing them for his customers. When the two met, Mike knew what he was looking at...OPPORTUNITY.

These posters are works of art just as vintage posters are. They may not be of the same quality as a Norman Rockwell Satruday Evening Post cover, but they nevertheless carry great nostalgia and significance, which makes them ripe for the collectible market.

These posters came from a day when illustrators were abundant and worked cheap. It was not huge cost to have original art created for each game poster. Mike and Andy have worked diligently to turn this sideline into a thriving print business. They have secured a professional distribution company and gone about getting proper licensing for each image. This in itself was a huge undertaking. You can see the result of their efforts on their site: www.historicfootballposters.com.

The business continues to grow and I predict it will be a cash cow for them for years to come. When you think about it, it is a near mortal lock type of business. There is a constantly replenished built-in audience of sports fans who love their college football teams -- show this work to some of them and they are going to have to own it. What is great is there is no competition. The images are vintage, the licenses from the universities involved is very hard to achieve, so there will be no knockoffs of this art. I wish them good luck, but am convinced they have already earned it.

As another example of seizing this type of opportunity, I have another friend who has secured the artwork for hundreds of garden and flower seed packets, all vintage. I predict he won't do as well as Mike and Andy, but he's got a potential for doing his own licensing and creating a print catalog that still will be timeless.

Keep your own mind open to opportunity. You might just find a great blog topic. Or if you are really lucky and truly paying attention, you might just find a fun lucrative side business of your own that will help take the pressure off having your art sales carrying your entire overhead.

Selling Limited Edition Prints - Take a Clue from Ferrari

I have long championed against the idea of using limited editions as a marketing tool for digital fine art reproductions, aka Giclées, for a variety of reasons. If you are interested to learn why I have this position, reading these posts will tell you:

• Creating Collectible Value in Open Editions
• Cooking Ham and Limited Editions — Is it time to stop limiting editions of giclées and offset prints?
• The Double Entendre of the Artist Selling Out
• The Secondary Art Market - Bev Doolittle's Beyond Negotiations Sold Out & The Lunacy of Limited Edition Giclees

There are many facets to the idea of not limiting editions. In a nutshell, by artificially limiting something that can be easily, endlessly, perfectly and affordably reproduced makes the scarcity argument specious to some extent. When you see artists creating numerous limited editions of the same image, it begs the question of what is limited. Most importantly, why cap the income by limiting images that might otherwise potentially sell well for decades? It can, in the long term, be a very costly proposition for the entire distribution chain including artists, publishers, galleries, dealers and printers.

Having forcibly made that argument for many years, I find no dichotomy in saying there can be a place for limited editions. An example would be a small run of 100-150 prints offered only in one size and one substrate. This is, of course, my opinion and you are free and encouraged to challenge it hear.

The Early to Rise newsletter which, amongst its onslaught of marketing for its wide variety of "how-to" courses, occasionally offers real gems of insight and inspiration. Such was the case with its recent email newsletter titled, Why Scarcity Triggers Sales. 

Before you jump to a conclusion on the strength of the title that it champions the idea of limited edition giclées, read this portion of the article:

I think verisimilitude - the appearance of truth - is the key to making scarcity work for your business. E-books don’t have it. You can say you’ll sell only 500 copies of your e-book, but there’s no "appearance of truth" in that. An e-book is just bits and bytes, so why would it be truly limited? I’ve seen some marketers use scarcity ploys that had me wondering if they really expected their customers to believe what they were saying. If your customers question your credibility… you’re done for.  

Yes, I agree giclée in nearly all cases will have more intrinsic value than ebooks are are far more complicated to create. But, today's informed consumers know they are digital artifacts made with bits and bytes, and as such making the argument for them being scarce is difficult at best. At the end of the day, I believe those predisposed to buy giclées are willing to purchase the work at fair prices based on purely on they want to live with it and enjoy it in their homes or businesses and the fact a piece is limited would be far down the list on their criteria for buying.

Still, Yanik Silver's ETR article offers an intriguing idea. In talking about the $600,000 Enzo, which is rarest of rare Ferraris, and which also is admittedly a very long stretch to digital prints. Silver points out the vehicles are strictly limited to a very small number (399) which automatically makes them rare. By only offering the cars to those buyers with a history of owning 3 or more Ferraris, it creates an exclusive club of potential buyers. Those who have the means and love Ferraris undoubtedly and eagerly lined up to be chosen to purchase an Enzo.

The suggestion here is to create a truly limited low number edition of a desirable piece not previously offered in print. Make the requirement that in order to have a chance to purchase the limited edition a buyer would have to have previously purchased three other pieces from your line. Many successful print artists have established collector societies that offer perks to loyal customers. A well executed plan around this idea just might be the start of something like that for your career.

I'm not going to make this post a tome with all kinds of suggestions on how to implement the idea. It's merely a suggestion for your consider how you might incorporate such a successful concept into your marketing. I realize with multiple distribution channels such as galleries, online sites, shows, direct sales and your own e-commerce efforts, it will be a challenge. But, I nevertheless believe if you are intrigued and motivated by the idea, you'll find a great creative way to make use of it.