|
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Mirus Gallery Poesia on Apr 29, 2015 7:34:31 GMT 1, It seems that there is a growing gap in this forum taste wise. Some collectors like light hearted themes, others something different but its a clear change for me from when I first joined the forum and bickering was less. I think this change in opinions is healthy for debate but maybe a thread dedicated to it is the best place versus an artists thread where they get bashed in the crossfire. And as more and more threads get heated debates about what they do and dont like, but people always hide behind one cliche or another. Why not start some conversation or introduce some topics open for discussion. Its a wide open debate open to all questions or topics within the realm of art.
One concern I have is a trend in Urban/Street artists taking a step towards commercial art versus a more established route of exhibitions and Outdoor painting. Most of what I witness seems to be a market that exists to make reproductions first versus originals or establishing a body of work that can be judged and critiqued. Selling out a Print seems easier in this new era than actually being given an exhibition and creating compelling work to be seen in person, or wall work is only to validate street credibility of a print. I also dont buy the Pop art copout becuase knowone is andy warhol or approaching printing like he did, its just a easy cliche to hang on to when talking about prints. I also dont hate prints, I love them when sprinkled in an artists oeuvre of work, I just think there is a place for them amongst a larger body of work.
The way I view things unless your output as an artist is print based media and you approach printing as your artform then an artist should proportionately create some other original work in order to build a career outside releases. I can see an artist like Shepard who actually utilized prints as an artistic output and I can appreciate that, but he seems to be the exception.
Hype has really taken a toll on this forum and I am curious to get the forums take on what I have called the forum effect, where artists are suddenly pushed beyond organic growth. Inflated releases with edition sizes and prices above and beyond some of todays best artists, yet people still buy and demand more. I am sure a percentage of these Hyped artists might do ok, but I think many are flawed and this fame might help a handful but the majority will disappear. All the while print houses cashing in curating One hit wonders much like todays top 40 music. We are in a time when an edition worth 15K of an image sells out while an original by the same artist reaches no where near that mark. What happen to basing edition prices and sizes off the original cost of originals.
Maybe I am an idealist but I think we could have some relevant discussions about some of these issues and maybe enlightening all of us in some way.
It seems that there is a growing gap in this forum taste wise. Some collectors like light hearted themes, others something different but its a clear change for me from when I first joined the forum and bickering was less. I think this change in opinions is healthy for debate but maybe a thread dedicated to it is the best place versus an artists thread where they get bashed in the crossfire. And as more and more threads get heated debates about what they do and dont like, but people always hide behind one cliche or another. Why not start some conversation or introduce some topics open for discussion. Its a wide open debate open to all questions or topics within the realm of art.
One concern I have is a trend in Urban/Street artists taking a step towards commercial art versus a more established route of exhibitions and Outdoor painting. Most of what I witness seems to be a market that exists to make reproductions first versus originals or establishing a body of work that can be judged and critiqued. Selling out a Print seems easier in this new era than actually being given an exhibition and creating compelling work to be seen in person, or wall work is only to validate street credibility of a print. I also dont buy the Pop art copout becuase knowone is andy warhol or approaching printing like he did, its just a easy cliche to hang on to when talking about prints. I also dont hate prints, I love them when sprinkled in an artists oeuvre of work, I just think there is a place for them amongst a larger body of work.
The way I view things unless your output as an artist is print based media and you approach printing as your artform then an artist should proportionately create some other original work in order to build a career outside releases. I can see an artist like Shepard who actually utilized prints as an artistic output and I can appreciate that, but he seems to be the exception.
Hype has really taken a toll on this forum and I am curious to get the forums take on what I have called the forum effect, where artists are suddenly pushed beyond organic growth. Inflated releases with edition sizes and prices above and beyond some of todays best artists, yet people still buy and demand more. I am sure a percentage of these Hyped artists might do ok, but I think many are flawed and this fame might help a handful but the majority will disappear. All the while print houses cashing in curating One hit wonders much like todays top 40 music. We are in a time when an edition worth 15K of an image sells out while an original by the same artist reaches no where near that mark. What happen to basing edition prices and sizes off the original cost of originals.
Maybe I am an idealist but I think we could have some relevant discussions about some of these issues and maybe enlightening all of us in some way.
|
|
|
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Happy Shopper on Apr 29, 2015 7:42:22 GMT 1, I agree entirely... But this isn't anything new. It's been happening for years.
I agree entirely... But this isn't anything new. It's been happening for years.
|
|
trapnel1
New Member
Posts โข 654
Likes โข 458
September 2008
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by trapnel1 on Apr 29, 2015 8:21:51 GMT 1, It's not specific to art, but part of a more general cultural phenomenon, related to wider availability of information and markets, and reduced attention span on the part of the "audience". Something very similar happens in the book collecting world (with modern first editions), and I'm sure in lots of other spheres of collecting as well.......
Prices rise quickly and then fall. There's no doubt that for some people it represents primarily an opportunity to make money, and there's nothing wrong with that - but useful for collectors to be aware of the curve.
Develop your own taste and buy what you like rather than relying on the hype.
It's not specific to art, but part of a more general cultural phenomenon, related to wider availability of information and markets, and reduced attention span on the part of the "audience". Something very similar happens in the book collecting world (with modern first editions), and I'm sure in lots of other spheres of collecting as well.......
Prices rise quickly and then fall. There's no doubt that for some people it represents primarily an opportunity to make money, and there's nothing wrong with that - but useful for collectors to be aware of the curve.
Develop your own taste and buy what you like rather than relying on the hype.
|
|
|
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Mirus Gallery Poesia on Apr 29, 2015 8:27:21 GMT 1, It's not specific to art, but part of a more general cultural phenomenon, related to wider availability of information and markets, and reduced attention span on the part of the "audience". Something very similar happens in the book collecting world (with modern first editions), and I'm sure in lots of other spheres of collecting as well....... Prices rise quickly and then fall. There's no doubt that for some people it represents primarily an opportunity to make money, and there's nothing wrong with that - but useful for collectors to be aware of the curve. Develop your own taste and buy what you like rather than relying on the hype.
And I guess it has been and will be around for awhile, but atleast we can talk about it maybe bringing some of it to light.
It's not specific to art, but part of a more general cultural phenomenon, related to wider availability of information and markets, and reduced attention span on the part of the "audience". Something very similar happens in the book collecting world (with modern first editions), and I'm sure in lots of other spheres of collecting as well....... Prices rise quickly and then fall. There's no doubt that for some people it represents primarily an opportunity to make money, and there's nothing wrong with that - but useful for collectors to be aware of the curve. Develop your own taste and buy what you like rather than relying on the hype. In America most young kids collected Baseball cards in a similar manner chasing the potential of value but with no real knowledge other than a Price guide that further hyped the industry. I see definite similarities sometimes, but I really dont see it when I look outside of print releases. I am used to Sales be slow with originals as it should be, people thinking twice and staying on the fence longer before buying in. And I guess it has been and will be around for awhile, but atleast we can talk about it maybe bringing some of it to light. |
|
Poly Mindset
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,174
Likes โข 1,578
March 2014
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Poly Mindset on Apr 29, 2015 8:28:20 GMT 1, It seems that there is a growing gap in this forum taste wise. Some collectors like light hearted themes, others something different but its a clear change for me from when I first joined the forum and bickering was less. I think this change in opinions is healthy for debate but maybe a thread dedicated to it is the best place versus an artists thread where they get bashed in the crossfire. And as more and more threads get heated debates about what they do and dont like, but people always hide behind one cliche or another. Why not start some conversation or introduce some topics open for discussion. Its a wide open debate open to all questions or topics within the realm of art. One concern I have is a trend in Urban/Street artists taking a step towards commercial art versus a more established route of exhibitions and Outdoor painting. Most of what I witness seems to be a market that exists to make reproductions first versus originals or establishing a body of work that can be judged and critiqued. Selling out a Print seems easier in this new era than actually being given an exhibition and creating compelling work to be seen in person, or wall work is only to validate street credibility of a print. I also dont buy the Pop art copout becuase knowone is andy warhol or approaching printing like he did, its just a easy cliche to hang on to when talking about prints. I also dont hate prints, I love them when sprinkled in an artists oeuvre of work, I just think there is a place for them amongst a larger body of work. The way I view things unless your output as an artist is print based media and you approach printing as your artform then an artist should proportionately create some other original work in order to build a career outside releases. I can see an artist like Shepard who actually utilized prints as an artistic output and I can appreciate that, but he seems to be the exception. Hype has really taken a toll on this forum and I am curious to get the forums take on what I have called the forum effect, where artists are suddenly pushed beyond organic growth. Inflated releases with edition sizes and prices above and beyond some of todays best artists, yet people still buy and demand more. I am sure a percentage of these Hyped artists might do ok, but I think many are flawed and this fame might help a handful but the majority will disappear. All the while print houses cashing in curating One hit wonders much like todays top 40 music. We are in a time when an edition worth 15K of an image sells out while an original by the same artist reaches no where near that mark. What happen to basing edition prices and sizes off the original cost of originals. Maybe I am an idealist but I think we could have some relevant discussions about some of these issues and maybe enlightening all of us in some way.
Really makes me appreciate Banksy more and more.
It seems that there is a growing gap in this forum taste wise. Some collectors like light hearted themes, others something different but its a clear change for me from when I first joined the forum and bickering was less. I think this change in opinions is healthy for debate but maybe a thread dedicated to it is the best place versus an artists thread where they get bashed in the crossfire. And as more and more threads get heated debates about what they do and dont like, but people always hide behind one cliche or another. Why not start some conversation or introduce some topics open for discussion. Its a wide open debate open to all questions or topics within the realm of art. One concern I have is a trend in Urban/Street artists taking a step towards commercial art versus a more established route of exhibitions and Outdoor painting. Most of what I witness seems to be a market that exists to make reproductions first versus originals or establishing a body of work that can be judged and critiqued. Selling out a Print seems easier in this new era than actually being given an exhibition and creating compelling work to be seen in person, or wall work is only to validate street credibility of a print. I also dont buy the Pop art copout becuase knowone is andy warhol or approaching printing like he did, its just a easy cliche to hang on to when talking about prints. I also dont hate prints, I love them when sprinkled in an artists oeuvre of work, I just think there is a place for them amongst a larger body of work. The way I view things unless your output as an artist is print based media and you approach printing as your artform then an artist should proportionately create some other original work in order to build a career outside releases. I can see an artist like Shepard who actually utilized prints as an artistic output and I can appreciate that, but he seems to be the exception. Hype has really taken a toll on this forum and I am curious to get the forums take on what I have called the forum effect, where artists are suddenly pushed beyond organic growth. Inflated releases with edition sizes and prices above and beyond some of todays best artists, yet people still buy and demand more. I am sure a percentage of these Hyped artists might do ok, but I think many are flawed and this fame might help a handful but the majority will disappear. All the while print houses cashing in curating One hit wonders much like todays top 40 music. We are in a time when an edition worth 15K of an image sells out while an original by the same artist reaches no where near that mark. What happen to basing edition prices and sizes off the original cost of originals. Maybe I am an idealist but I think we could have some relevant discussions about some of these issues and maybe enlightening all of us in some way. I understand what you are saying but you must be intelligent enough to realize that larger editions of prints are a way that art lovers/collectors who can't afford some artists' originals can obtain their works. Also print houses aren't the only ones cashing in on print releases. Some artists themselves are making cash hand over fist too. As a recent example let's use JJ Adams, not someone I collect or respect but you get my meaning I'm sure. Additionally, there are many more artists doing the same thing which begs the question, shouldn't we hold certain artist responsible for driving the market of these multiple larger releases as well as the print houses? It all boils down to supply and demand. If the demand is there it will be supplied by many(but not all) artist. I believe this is exactly what made Bansky stop producing art. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he just get sick of it all? However, at the same time it's hard to blame artists for their success, as we all know some artists never get it no matter how good they are. Although I may not agree with it, I do understand the get it while you can mentality. It is a quandary. Makes me wonder if there is just too much art and art business out there. Really makes me appreciate Banksy more and more. |
|
sparky999
New Member
Posts โข 714
Likes โข 535
October 2013
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by sparky999 on Apr 29, 2015 9:15:45 GMT 1, You sound like the old guy moaning about how things didn't used to be like this.
You sound like the old guy moaning about how things didn't used to be like this.
|
|
|
|
Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 9:21:15 GMT 1, What's goin' on?, things didn't used to be like this!.
What's goin' on?, things didn't used to be like this!.
|
|
|
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Mirus Gallery Poesia on Apr 29, 2015 9:24:28 GMT 1, I understand what you are saying but you must be intelligent enough to realize that larger editions of prints are a way that art lovers/collectors who can't afford some artists' originals can obtain their works. Also print houses aren't the only ones cashing in on print releases. Some artists themselves are making cash hand over fist too. As a recent example let's use JJ Adams, not someone I collect or respect but you get my meaning I'm sure. Additionally, there are many more artists doing the same thing which begs the question, shouldn't we hold certain artist responsible for driving the market of these multiple larger releases as well as the print houses? It all boils down to supply and demand. If the demand is there it will be supplied by many(but not all) artist. I believe this is exactly what made Bansky stop producing art. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he just get sick of it all? However, at the same time it's hard to blame artists for their success, as we all know some artists never get it no matter how good they are. Although I may not agree with it, I do understand the get it while you can mentality. It is a quandary. Makes me wonder if there is just too much art and art business out there. Really makes me appreciate Banksy more and more.
And that is why I put some of the blame on the printhouses because they know the formulas to price these prints yet they choose to ignore them and create these bubbles which have short term gains. From personal experience when it comes to artists pricing their work even the best have a hard time knowing what they should charge, and because of this I know the influence a printhouse could have on artists that most likely give in to the advise of others thus increasing prices. I have worked with great artists that do understand pricing and they keep the slow path leading to a natural rise even when hyped.
Just look at the printhouses in it for the longrun most have kept a model of prices consistent even when demand is strong, compared to others who raise prices and editions based on demand. I guess its a different business strategy.
I understand what you are saying but you must be intelligent enough to realize that larger editions of prints are a way that art lovers/collectors who can't afford some artists' originals can obtain their works. Also print houses aren't the only ones cashing in on print releases. Some artists themselves are making cash hand over fist too. As a recent example let's use JJ Adams, not someone I collect or respect but you get my meaning I'm sure. Additionally, there are many more artists doing the same thing which begs the question, shouldn't we hold certain artist responsible for driving the market of these multiple larger releases as well as the print houses? It all boils down to supply and demand. If the demand is there it will be supplied by many(but not all) artist. I believe this is exactly what made Bansky stop producing art. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he just get sick of it all? However, at the same time it's hard to blame artists for their success, as we all know some artists never get it no matter how good they are. Although I may not agree with it, I do understand the get it while you can mentality. It is a quandary. Makes me wonder if there is just too much art and art business out there. Really makes me appreciate Banksy more and more. I am not against Large editions at all, I think there is a definite need for them in exactly the case you mention where an artists orginals are out of range for most and collectors get a chance to be a part of owning something by the artist. But what the Hype in this genre has done is throw normal rules and thresholds out the door. Prints are more expensive and of larger editions even when an artists originals are not out of range for average collectors. I dont know the exact formula for pricing an edition but last time I released a print release it was based off what originals cost and affordable for collectors. I think a good printer does this for the artists and understands the need to keep things organic. But some use the demand to increase prices substantially and create variants to increase demand also. I am not sure of this new math where a 15K release relates to far more than what the original sells for. And that is why I put some of the blame on the printhouses because they know the formulas to price these prints yet they choose to ignore them and create these bubbles which have short term gains. From personal experience when it comes to artists pricing their work even the best have a hard time knowing what they should charge, and because of this I know the influence a printhouse could have on artists that most likely give in to the advise of others thus increasing prices. I have worked with great artists that do understand pricing and they keep the slow path leading to a natural rise even when hyped. Just look at the printhouses in it for the longrun most have kept a model of prices consistent even when demand is strong, compared to others who raise prices and editions based on demand. I guess its a different business strategy. |
|
|
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Mirus Gallery Poesia on Apr 29, 2015 9:25:07 GMT 1, You sound like the old guy moaning about how things didn't used to be like this.
You sound like the old guy moaning about how things didn't used to be like this. No I am saying things dont have to be like this. |
|
Dr Plip
Junior Member
Posts โข 7,043
Likes โข 8,981
August 2011
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Dr Plip on Apr 29, 2015 9:42:37 GMT 1, 
|
|
sparky999
New Member
Posts โข 714
Likes โข 535
October 2013
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by sparky999 on Apr 29, 2015 10:17:15 GMT 1, You sound like the old guy moaning about how things didn't used to be like this. No I am saying things dont have to be like this.
Economics 101 - if there is a demand for a product it will be supplied by the market. Laws, your personal opinion or the historical norm are not enough to stop it.
You sound like the old guy moaning about how things didn't used to be like this. No I am saying things dont have to be like this. Whatever your trying to say - it sounds like the old guy who missed the gravy train. Economics 101 - if there is a demand for a product it will be supplied by the market. Laws, your personal opinion or the historical norm are not enough to stop it. |
|
erik
New Member
Posts โข 204
Likes โข 151
March 2013
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by erik on Apr 29, 2015 10:45:37 GMT 1, The gravy train.. Yes, there is a marked right now. Economics 102 - get out while you can.
The gravy train.. Yes, there is a marked right now. Economics 102 - get out while you can.
|
|
Hairbland
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,943
Likes โข 2,731
November 2010
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Hairbland on Apr 29, 2015 12:32:03 GMT 1, I think you are referring to the gentrification of the street art / urban art market. Much like Williamsburg went from old Italian families to artists to hipsters to yuppies in glass towers, who having heard of the edge might want a Brainwash, Abrams or Whatson for their wall.
There was a first wave, and out of that wave you have some artists that have been recognized as significant - Banksy, KAWS and Faile are 3 that come to mind - whether you dislike 1 or all they have steadily grown to museum shows, art house monographs and multi media.
Before anyone gets upset, yes street art existed before these 3, I've lived in NYC since 60's so I'm aware of pre-Banksy I particularly enjoyed the graffiti subway system.
Anyway, with a wave detritus gets swept up, including at times unsuccessful artists that change their style to make a buck. Anyone using superheroes or Star Wars, which push a nostalgia button, for example. When you have a hungry and growing audience, which Banksy helped create (although he is not the only one as a check of who the auction houses are following will show) you will have many imposters. Tabby the latest IMHO, but there's a few new ones every month.
There have been previous threads as to who from this scene might stand the test of time in the art world, with most agreeing on maybe 3, or if lucky 5 artists. As Banksy and KAWS were pretty much unanimously picked that leaves 1-3 names left. Jose Parla probably another.
The scene is drawing new talent that might not stick around as "street art", people love Dale Marshall I do also but I see him as fine art, and Bisser talented I see a career as a talented illustrator.
I think you are referring to the gentrification of the street art / urban art market. Much like Williamsburg went from old Italian families to artists to hipsters to yuppies in glass towers, who having heard of the edge might want a Brainwash, Abrams or Whatson for their wall.
There was a first wave, and out of that wave you have some artists that have been recognized as significant - Banksy, KAWS and Faile are 3 that come to mind - whether you dislike 1 or all they have steadily grown to museum shows, art house monographs and multi media.
Before anyone gets upset, yes street art existed before these 3, I've lived in NYC since 60's so I'm aware of pre-Banksy I particularly enjoyed the graffiti subway system.
Anyway, with a wave detritus gets swept up, including at times unsuccessful artists that change their style to make a buck. Anyone using superheroes or Star Wars, which push a nostalgia button, for example. When you have a hungry and growing audience, which Banksy helped create (although he is not the only one as a check of who the auction houses are following will show) you will have many imposters. Tabby the latest IMHO, but there's a few new ones every month.
There have been previous threads as to who from this scene might stand the test of time in the art world, with most agreeing on maybe 3, or if lucky 5 artists. As Banksy and KAWS were pretty much unanimously picked that leaves 1-3 names left. Jose Parla probably another.
The scene is drawing new talent that might not stick around as "street art", people love Dale Marshall I do also but I see him as fine art, and Bisser talented I see a career as a talented illustrator.
|
|
samfrost
New Member
Posts โข 783
Likes โข 526
June 2014
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by samfrost on Apr 29, 2015 13:03:12 GMT 1, Agree 100% with the original poster. Too many of these artists are focused on making quick cash off of prints vs building a stable collector base which you can cultivate a career.
I feel bad for many of these artists as they are talented in their own unique way, but their names will likely fade into oblivion as a new flavor of the week comes about. If I see another Marilyn, Soup Can, Kate Moss or selfie I am going to lose it! Also the same goes for the Bacon look of faces as subjects....so overplayed by dozens of artists these days with only a slight modification.
Agree 100% with the original poster. Too many of these artists are focused on making quick cash off of prints vs building a stable collector base which you can cultivate a career.
I feel bad for many of these artists as they are talented in their own unique way, but their names will likely fade into oblivion as a new flavor of the week comes about. If I see another Marilyn, Soup Can, Kate Moss or selfie I am going to lose it! Also the same goes for the Bacon look of faces as subjects....so overplayed by dozens of artists these days with only a slight modification.
|
|
|
|
Petrusino
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,102
Likes โข 545
November 2011
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Petrusino on Apr 29, 2015 14:20:24 GMT 1, everyone is free to buy and hype what they like but we do not forget that street art is born not as simple visual art but also as a way of achieving a goal bringing art to the streets, to beautify degraded areas,to highlight a building that should be requalified, to make people smile, to make people think about society's problems etc. Artists which consider themselves Street/Urban Artists should sell prints to also finance their art in the streets not just to make profit. there are too many fake artists out there born in recent years just to make cash, street art is more. I blame some new galleries that just try to ride the wave of profit with expensive print of poor quality. the value of these prints is surely destined to collapse over time because behind many of these new artists and gallery there is not philosophy and artistic research but just speculation.
everyone is free to buy and hype what they like but we do not forget that street art is born not as simple visual art but also as a way of achieving a goal bringing art to the streets, to beautify degraded areas,to highlight a building that should be requalified, to make people smile, to make people think about society's problems etc. Artists which consider themselves Street/Urban Artists should sell prints to also finance their art in the streets not just to make profit. there are too many fake artists out there born in recent years just to make cash, street art is more. I blame some new galleries that just try to ride the wave of profit with expensive print of poor quality. the value of these prints is surely destined to collapse over time because behind many of these new artists and gallery there is not philosophy and artistic research but just speculation.
|
|
Poly Mindset
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,174
Likes โข 1,578
March 2014
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Poly Mindset on Apr 29, 2015 16:52:25 GMT 1, everyone is free to buy and hype what they like but we do not forget that street art is born not as simple visual art but also as a way of achieving a goal bringing art to the streets, to beautify degraded areas,to highlight a building that should be requalified, to make people smile, to make people think about society's problems etc. Artists which consider themselves Street/Urban Artists should sell prints to also finance their art in the streets not just to make profit. there are too many fake artists out there born in recent years just to make cash, street art is more. I blame some new galleries that just try to ride the wave of profit with expensive print of poor quality. the value of these prints is surely destined to collapse over time because behind many of these new artists and gallery there is not philosophy and artistic research but just speculation.
everyone is free to buy and hype what they like but we do not forget that street art is born not as simple visual art but also as a way of achieving a goal bringing art to the streets, to beautify degraded areas,to highlight a building that should be requalified, to make people smile, to make people think about society's problems etc. Artists which consider themselves Street/Urban Artists should sell prints to also finance their art in the streets not just to make profit. there are too many fake artists out there born in recent years just to make cash, street art is more. I blame some new galleries that just try to ride the wave of profit with expensive print of poor quality. the value of these prints is surely destined to collapse over time because behind many of these new artists and gallery there is not philosophy and artistic research but just speculation. I agree with you on this point whole heartedly. I recently purchased a Qbic drawing and spoke with, shall we say his agent who sells his work. His agent doesn't own a print house but rather handles the sales of originals so that Qbic can continue to dedicate his time to larger projects i.e. murals on buildings and painting original canvases, which is expensive and time consuming. It's nice and refreshing to see an artist hold true to what he does best. I mean how many large edition print releases have you seen Qbic do? I don't know that he's done any print releases, but rather finances his project through sale of his originals. He is an extremely talented artist who apparently gets exactly what you're saying. He is building a career and will remain in demand as long as he doesn't become spoiled by the system. He is controlling his demand by not having large print releases. Although I do love his work, it doesn't hurt to feel that he is a good investment because of the way he handles his business. It would be nice to see more artist do exactly what he's doing. |
|
overend
New Member
Posts โข 587
Likes โข 386
October 2013
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by overend on Apr 29, 2015 18:04:10 GMT 1, I don't understand why artists have to issue a print for every half baked idea they have? Zero quality control. Why do entry level stencil artists issue prints when they could easily do a similar level of originals. Why are people buying into this? This isn't going to end well for most.
I don't understand why artists have to issue a print for every half baked idea they have? Zero quality control. Why do entry level stencil artists issue prints when they could easily do a similar level of originals. Why are people buying into this? This isn't going to end well for most.
|
|
Acidburn
Art Gallery
New Member
Posts โข 268
Likes โข 375
December 2013
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Acidburn on Apr 29, 2015 18:31:47 GMT 1, Tabby is a perfect example of this. An edition of 130 @ $125 ($16,250) sells out in 10 minutes, yet what does the guy sell originals for? $300-$400? After you frame that garbage print, you are in deep enough to have been able to buy an original. But, of course, no one frames this crap. It sells on speculation and rots in a flat file or a portfolio.
If you want to get into numbers
Actually only 2% of Tabby's first print I saw on the second market and now similar with his newest print. So leading me to believe that 98% of ppl actually enjoyed the print that purchased it.
As for originals, Tabby def has been gracious up to this point being that a lot of his originals aren't numbered or signed. He just has been doing it for fun.
Tabby is a perfect example of this. An edition of 130 @ $125 ($16,250) sells out in 10 minutes, yet what does the guy sell originals for? $300-$400? After you frame that garbage print, you are in deep enough to have been able to buy an original. But, of course, no one frames this crap. It sells on speculation and rots in a flat file or a portfolio. If you want to get into numbers Actually only 2% of Tabby's first print I saw on the second market and now similar with his newest print. So leading me to believe that 98% of ppl actually enjoyed the print that purchased it. As for originals, Tabby def has been gracious up to this point being that a lot of his originals aren't numbered or signed. He just has been doing it for fun. |
|
Hairbland
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,943
Likes โข 2,731
November 2010
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Hairbland on Apr 29, 2015 18:55:41 GMT 1, Tabby is a perfect example of this. An edition of 130 @ $125 ($16,250) sells out in 10 minutes, yet what does the guy sell originals for? $300-$400? After you frame that garbage print, you are in deep enough to have been able to buy an original. But, of course, no one frames this crap. It sells on speculation and rots in a flat file or a portfolio. If you want to get into numbers Actually only 2% of Tabby's first print I saw on the second market and now similar with his newest print. So leading me to believe that 98% of ppl actually enjoyed the print that purchased it. As for originals, Tabby def has been gracious up to this point being that a lot of his originals aren't numbered or signed. He just has been doing it for fun.
To me it seems like stuff students would do at SVA before finding their own style.
Tabby is a perfect example of this. An edition of 130 @ $125 ($16,250) sells out in 10 minutes, yet what does the guy sell originals for? $300-$400? After you frame that garbage print, you are in deep enough to have been able to buy an original. But, of course, no one frames this crap. It sells on speculation and rots in a flat file or a portfolio. If you want to get into numbers Actually only 2% of Tabby's first print I saw on the second market and now similar with his newest print. So leading me to believe that 98% of ppl actually enjoyed the print that purchased it. As for originals, Tabby def has been gracious up to this point being that a lot of his originals aren't numbered or signed. He just has been doing it for fun. Maybe Tabby doesn't have a secondary market. No insult to UTB, as you handled Bisser wonderfully, but the new Tabby print seems like a mishmash of unoriginal ideas...Mary Poppins and a TSA guy. I see zero meaning to this print other than a literal interpretation, never a good sign, made in a Banksy style with a Banksy-like signature. No biggie, I deleted the email immediately...but definitely a cash in type release. Which is fine...as long as one doesn't get annoyed when others criticize. To me it seems like stuff students would do at SVA before finding their own style. |
|
Acidburn
Art Gallery
New Member
Posts โข 268
Likes โข 375
December 2013
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Acidburn on Apr 29, 2015 19:08:35 GMT 1, If you want to get into numbers Actually only 2% of Tabby's first print I saw on the second market and now similar with his newest print. So leading me to believe that 98% of ppl actually enjoyed the print that purchased it. As for originals, Tabby def has been gracious up to this point being that a lot of his originals aren't numbered or signed. He just has been doing it for fun. Maybe Tabby doesn't have a secondary market. ย No insult to UTB, as you handled Bisser wonderfully, but the new Tabby print seems like a mishmash of unoriginal ideas...Mary Poppins and a TSA guy. ย I see zero meaning to this print other than a literal interpretation, never a good sign, made in a Banksy style with a Banksy-like signature. ย No biggie, I deleted the email immediately...but definitely a cash in type release. Which is fine...as long as one doesn't get annoyed when others criticize. To me it seems like stuff students would do at SVA before finding their own style. ย
Problem is words like "cash in".
Obviously, worst person to comment on an artist he is selling, but I think it's hard to grasp to some of you but...people actually really like the image. Including myself. And I would have purchased it as well if I was on the other side.
Not because of any potential profit but because I genuinely really like the idea. Just like I like a bunch of his other images.
Also, you mention Bisser. Another one who I can't wait to see how he evolves. However, the op also chose to come into his thread and express what seemed like frustration that people actually liked and purchased his work for the price offered.
Not trying to be a dick at all but maybe instead of writing on a forum how you can't understand things, maybe sit back and try to focus on building the artists market that showcase at your gallery. Right now, my goal is to focus on people who really do like Tabby and Bisser and any other artist we work with a market. It goes a long way.
If you want to get into numbers Actually only 2% of Tabby's first print I saw on the second market and now similar with his newest print. So leading me to believe that 98% of ppl actually enjoyed the print that purchased it. As for originals, Tabby def has been gracious up to this point being that a lot of his originals aren't numbered or signed. He just has been doing it for fun. Maybe Tabby doesn't have a secondary market. ย No insult to UTB, as you handled Bisser wonderfully, but the new Tabby print seems like a mishmash of unoriginal ideas...Mary Poppins and a TSA guy. ย I see zero meaning to this print other than a literal interpretation, never a good sign, made in a Banksy style with a Banksy-like signature. ย No biggie, I deleted the email immediately...but definitely a cash in type release. Which is fine...as long as one doesn't get annoyed when others criticize. To me it seems like stuff students would do at SVA before finding their own style. ย Problem is words like "cash in". Obviously, worst person to comment on an artist he is selling, but I think it's hard to grasp to some of you but...people actually really like the image. Including myself. And I would have purchased it as well if I was on the other side. Not because of any potential profit but because I genuinely really like the idea. Just like I like a bunch of his other images. Also, you mention Bisser. Another one who I can't wait to see how he evolves. However, the op also chose to come into his thread and express what seemed like frustration that people actually liked and purchased his work for the price offered. Not trying to be a dick at all but maybe instead of writing on a forum how you can't understand things, maybe sit back and try to focus on building the artists market that showcase at your gallery. Right now, my goal is to focus on people who really do like Tabby and Bisser and any other artist we work with a market. It goes a long way. |
|
monsoonking
New Member
Posts โข 143
Likes โข 81
July 2011
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by monsoonking on Apr 29, 2015 19:35:33 GMT 1, It all seems perfectly rational to me.
For the most part, talented artists who speak with their own voice limit their artistic output to high quality work that will stand the test of time. Artists like KAWS, Banksy, Retna, and Jose Parla, resist the urge to flood the market and play the long game in terms of building their careers. They can afford to be patient because they have something meaningful to contribute to the art world.
Derivative artists like Tabby and Eyesaw (to pick a couple in the long list of examples) need to strike while the iron is hot. Their work is going to be worthless and forgotten in 10 years, so they stuff the channel with as much garbage as the market will bear.
Why do people buy this stuff? I dunno. Most people have horrible taste. They see that this Banksy character is pretty popular, so in the absence of any developed view about what makes art interesting, they buy something that looks just like Banksy.
At the end of the day, buying garbage art is all pretty harmless. To each their own, if it makes you happy, yada yada. It's just sad that artists are encouraged by the market to produce more boring knockoffs rather than channeling their creativity into developing their own style and voice.
It all seems perfectly rational to me.
For the most part, talented artists who speak with their own voice limit their artistic output to high quality work that will stand the test of time. Artists like KAWS, Banksy, Retna, and Jose Parla, resist the urge to flood the market and play the long game in terms of building their careers. They can afford to be patient because they have something meaningful to contribute to the art world.
Derivative artists like Tabby and Eyesaw (to pick a couple in the long list of examples) need to strike while the iron is hot. Their work is going to be worthless and forgotten in 10 years, so they stuff the channel with as much garbage as the market will bear.
Why do people buy this stuff? I dunno. Most people have horrible taste. They see that this Banksy character is pretty popular, so in the absence of any developed view about what makes art interesting, they buy something that looks just like Banksy.
At the end of the day, buying garbage art is all pretty harmless. To each their own, if it makes you happy, yada yada. It's just sad that artists are encouraged by the market to produce more boring knockoffs rather than channeling their creativity into developing their own style and voice.
|
|
Acidburn
Art Gallery
New Member
Posts โข 268
Likes โข 375
December 2013
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Acidburn on Apr 29, 2015 19:41:40 GMT 1, It all seems perfectly rational to me. For the most part, talented artists who speak with their own voice limit their artistic output to high quality work that will stand the test of time. Artists like KAWS, Banksy, Retna, and Jose Parla, resist the urge to flood the market and play the long game in terms of building their careers. They can afford to be patient because they have something meaningful to contribute to the art world. Derivative artists like Tabby and Eyesaw (to pick a couple in the long list of examples) need to strike while the iron is hot. Their work is going to be worthless and forgotten in 10 years, so they stuff the channel with as much garbage as the market will bear. Why do people buy this stuff? I dunno. Most people have horrible taste. They see that this Banksy character is pretty popular, so in the absence of any developed view about what makes art interesting, they buy something that looks just like Banksy. At the end of the day, buying garbage art is all pretty harmless. To each their own, if it makes you happy, yada yada. It's just sad that artists are encouraged by the market to produce more boring knockoffs rather than channeling their creativity into developing their own style and voice.
You realize Banksy put out 13-15 pieces in his first year right?
It all seems perfectly rational to me. For the most part, talented artists who speak with their own voice limit their artistic output to high quality work that will stand the test of time. Artists like KAWS, Banksy, Retna, and Jose Parla, resist the urge to flood the market and play the long game in terms of building their careers. They can afford to be patient because they have something meaningful to contribute to the art world. Derivative artists like Tabby and Eyesaw (to pick a couple in the long list of examples) need to strike while the iron is hot. Their work is going to be worthless and forgotten in 10 years, so they stuff the channel with as much garbage as the market will bear. Why do people buy this stuff? I dunno. Most people have horrible taste. They see that this Banksy character is pretty popular, so in the absence of any developed view about what makes art interesting, they buy something that looks just like Banksy. At the end of the day, buying garbage art is all pretty harmless. To each their own, if it makes you happy, yada yada. It's just sad that artists are encouraged by the market to produce more boring knockoffs rather than channeling their creativity into developing their own style and voice. You realize Banksy put out 13-15 pieces in his first year right? |
|
|
|
Hairbland
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,943
Likes โข 2,731
November 2010
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Hairbland on Apr 29, 2015 19:58:10 GMT 1, It all seems perfectly rational to me. For the most part, talented artists who speak with their own voice limit their artistic output to high quality work that will stand the test of time. Artists like KAWS, Banksy, Retna, and Jose Parla, resist the urge to flood the market and play the long game in terms of building their careers. They can afford to be patient because they have something meaningful to contribute to the art world. Derivative artists like Tabby and Eyesaw (to pick a couple in the long list of examples) need to strike while the iron is hot. Their work is going to be worthless and forgotten in 10 years, so they stuff the channel with as much garbage as the market will bear. Why do people buy this stuff? I dunno. Most people have horrible taste. They see that this Banksy character is pretty popular, so in the absence of any developed view about what makes art interesting, they buy something that looks just like Banksy. At the end of the day, buying garbage art is all pretty harmless. To each their own, if it makes you happy, yada yada. It's just sad that artists are encouraged by the market to produce more boring knockoffs rather than channeling their creativity into developing their own style and voice. You realize Banksy put out 13-15 pieces in his first year right?
Perhaps, but he had something to say and created a market, working on more of a vacuum. No rules. Like KAWS with his interruptions.
It's obvious with Frye Boots, Poland Spring and other similar that there is a cashing in, some of it by artists and some by galleries.
It all seems perfectly rational to me. For the most part, talented artists who speak with their own voice limit their artistic output to high quality work that will stand the test of time. Artists like KAWS, Banksy, Retna, and Jose Parla, resist the urge to flood the market and play the long game in terms of building their careers. They can afford to be patient because they have something meaningful to contribute to the art world. Derivative artists like Tabby and Eyesaw (to pick a couple in the long list of examples) need to strike while the iron is hot. Their work is going to be worthless and forgotten in 10 years, so they stuff the channel with as much garbage as the market will bear. Why do people buy this stuff? I dunno. Most people have horrible taste. They see that this Banksy character is pretty popular, so in the absence of any developed view about what makes art interesting, they buy something that looks just like Banksy. At the end of the day, buying garbage art is all pretty harmless. To each their own, if it makes you happy, yada yada. It's just sad that artists are encouraged by the market to produce more boring knockoffs rather than channeling their creativity into developing their own style and voice. You realize Banksy put out 13-15 pieces in his first year right? Perhaps, but he had something to say and created a market, working on more of a vacuum. No rules. Like KAWS with his interruptions. It's obvious with Frye Boots, Poland Spring and other similar that there is a cashing in, some of it by artists and some by galleries. |
|
BKBOI
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,881
Likes โข 1,693
January 2013
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by BKBOI on Apr 29, 2015 20:01:48 GMT 1, I think if people just bought what they would actually hang, there would be no discussion at all.
Investing in art in the low end scale is like investing in OTC. Pump and dump is the name of the game.
I think if people just bought what they would actually hang, there would be no discussion at all.
Investing in art in the low end scale is like investing in OTC. Pump and dump is the name of the game.
|
|
badbay
New Member
Posts โข 92
Likes โข 49
January 2015
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by badbay on Apr 29, 2015 20:20:28 GMT 1, I like tabby because it is a bit if fun, i like what he is doing and the works will look good on my walls. I am also interested in many other artists who's works are more complex, interesting and thought provoking. There have been lots of very patronising comments by people on these forums who seem to put themselves on a pedestal as high art critics just because they own a couple of banksy prints. I don't think a few people expressing an interest in work counts as a ridiculous amount if hype. Banksy is no Robin Hood he has one of the best marketing and hype strategies out there allowing him to sell works to rich collectors at massively inflated prices for what are just stencils whilst some fine art by accomplished artists sell for much less. Im not dissing him i like what he is doing. Apologies for grammar etc sent from s**tty iphone
I like tabby because it is a bit if fun, i like what he is doing and the works will look good on my walls. I am also interested in many other artists who's works are more complex, interesting and thought provoking. There have been lots of very patronising comments by people on these forums who seem to put themselves on a pedestal as high art critics just because they own a couple of banksy prints. I don't think a few people expressing an interest in work counts as a ridiculous amount if hype. Banksy is no Robin Hood he has one of the best marketing and hype strategies out there allowing him to sell works to rich collectors at massively inflated prices for what are just stencils whilst some fine art by accomplished artists sell for much less. Im not dissing him i like what he is doing. Apologies for grammar etc sent from s**tty iphone
|
|
|
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Mirus Gallery Poesia on Apr 29, 2015 21:12:42 GMT 1, Problem is words like "cash in". Obviously, worst person to comment on an artist he is selling, but I think it's hard to grasp to some of you but...people actually really like the image. Including myself. And I would have purchased it as well if I was on the other side. Not because of any potential profit but because I genuinely really like the idea. Just like I like a bunch of his other images. Also, you mention Bisser. Another one who I can't wait to see how he evolves. However, the op also chose to come into his thread and express what seemed like frustration that people actually liked and purchased his work for the price offered. Not trying to be a dick at all but maybe instead of writing on a forum how you can't understand things, maybe sit back and try to focus on building the artists market that showcase at your gallery. Right now, my goal is to focus on people who really do like Tabby and Bisser and any other artist we work with a market. It goes a long way.
This was the red flag that led me to make this thread and open the debate. I dont think every printer does it the same but there has been a general rule to make the price and edition size based on originals, maybe its outdated now who knows, but I still think it holds weight as a measuring stick.
You also mentioned numbers of what is going to secondary market saying the prints are not being flipped, I dont think thats a big factor as many buyers could have purchased multiple prints and holding them. But again I am speculating as I dont have that info only you do.
I am not trying to be a dick also, and I do everything I can to push and promote my artists but for me I choose a different path and choose to take the long road I guess.
Problem is words like "cash in". Obviously, worst person to comment on an artist he is selling, but I think it's hard to grasp to some of you but...people actually really like the image. Including myself. And I would have purchased it as well if I was on the other side. Not because of any potential profit but because I genuinely really like the idea. Just like I like a bunch of his other images. Also, you mention Bisser. Another one who I can't wait to see how he evolves. However, the op also chose to come into his thread and express what seemed like frustration that people actually liked and purchased his work for the price offered. Not trying to be a dick at all but maybe instead of writing on a forum how you can't understand things, maybe sit back and try to focus on building the artists market that showcase at your gallery. Right now, my goal is to focus on people who really do like Tabby and Bisser and any other artist we work with a market. It goes a long way. I made some general statements about printers I wasnt exactly pointing fingers but since you brought some numbers into it. Maybe you can comment on how you come up with edition sizes and pricepoints of a release from an emerging artists. Do you have a formula? I have nothing against Bisser or Tabby my comments in the Bisser thread was my curiosity in the pricing of the edition. As someone else pointed out how does a 15K+ release make sense when originals sell for a fraction of that. This was the red flag that led me to make this thread and open the debate. I dont think every printer does it the same but there has been a general rule to make the price and edition size based on originals, maybe its outdated now who knows, but I still think it holds weight as a measuring stick. You also mentioned numbers of what is going to secondary market saying the prints are not being flipped, I dont think thats a big factor as many buyers could have purchased multiple prints and holding them. But again I am speculating as I dont have that info only you do. I am not trying to be a dick also, and I do everything I can to push and promote my artists but for me I choose a different path and choose to take the long road I guess. |
|
anodyne13
New Member
Posts โข 432
Likes โข 212
April 2008
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by anodyne13 on Apr 29, 2015 21:46:43 GMT 1, Most all artists from the "Urban Art" genre will be forgotten over time. Historically, there can only be so many torch bearers for an art movement. New artists will have to find new ways of expression that speak to people or are contextually and culturally relevant.
In order for art to increase in value it needs a steady demand, and one can create that demand slowly by gaining collectors one by one, show by show, and increasing critical acclaim, or one can try to accelerate the process through marketing, alignment with tastemakers, and the ever elusive "buzz". I think that the primary tradeoff between the two approaches is that the slower process creates demand that has more staying power, but it takes a long time, and often without any indication that financial success is on the horizon. However, the quicker path may be the best for some artists (or even unavoidable to some extent), even if it carries with it more potential volatility in the long term demand.
Lastly I would say that, people often forget that these artists are people that are trying to make a living at something that is exceedingly difficult to make a living at. I applaud any artist that is willing to take the risk to do it as a profession and monetize it enough to make it work. So expecting artists to take a particular course of action that collectors feel is best for their art values or careers can be a bit presumptuous when there is an artist at the other end just trying to make ends meet, get health insurance, or plan for a family.
Most all artists from the "Urban Art" genre will be forgotten over time. Historically, there can only be so many torch bearers for an art movement. New artists will have to find new ways of expression that speak to people or are contextually and culturally relevant.
In order for art to increase in value it needs a steady demand, and one can create that demand slowly by gaining collectors one by one, show by show, and increasing critical acclaim, or one can try to accelerate the process through marketing, alignment with tastemakers, and the ever elusive "buzz". I think that the primary tradeoff between the two approaches is that the slower process creates demand that has more staying power, but it takes a long time, and often without any indication that financial success is on the horizon. However, the quicker path may be the best for some artists (or even unavoidable to some extent), even if it carries with it more potential volatility in the long term demand.
Lastly I would say that, people often forget that these artists are people that are trying to make a living at something that is exceedingly difficult to make a living at. I applaud any artist that is willing to take the risk to do it as a profession and monetize it enough to make it work. So expecting artists to take a particular course of action that collectors feel is best for their art values or careers can be a bit presumptuous when there is an artist at the other end just trying to make ends meet, get health insurance, or plan for a family.
|
|
|
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Jeezuz Jones Snr on Apr 29, 2015 21:59:15 GMT 1, People can deny it it but this forum is mainly for financial gain, same as any other forum for other markets : stocks, resources,housing etc..
These days (any new artist) just comes up with an image, any old s**t, hype the s**t out of it (by gallery or online printing gallery) and make sure it's handfinished with loads of jizz... And it well sell out quicksmart, then a year down the line and guys will be selling that print on here with any excuse ie. 'Need funds to buy wife new 10" rubber cock' etc...
It's been happening for years but lately more so as there are more artists, more social media, more people getting involved to try to make money.. Hence more arguments.
People can deny it it but this forum is mainly for financial gain, same as any other forum for other markets : stocks, resources,housing etc..
These days (any new artist) just comes up with an image, any old s**t, hype the s**t out of it (by gallery or online printing gallery) and make sure it's handfinished with loads of jizz... And it well sell out quicksmart, then a year down the line and guys will be selling that print on here with any excuse ie. 'Need funds to buy wife new 10" rubber cock' etc...
It's been happening for years but lately more so as there are more artists, more social media, more people getting involved to try to make money.. Hence more arguments.
|
|
Gard
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,604
Likes โข 1,243
June 2012
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by Gard on Apr 29, 2015 22:06:20 GMT 1, The big problem is that people can't see the difference between a graphic designer and an artist. 99% of the so called artist these days are just glorified graphic designers. They number and sign their posters instead of publishing it on Behance.
The big problem is that people can't see the difference between a graphic designer and an artist. 99% of the so called artist these days are just glorified graphic designers. They number and sign their posters instead of publishing it on Behance.
|
|
davievegas
New Member
Posts โข 983
Likes โข 355
January 2013
|
Art Debate / Dont Believe the Hype, by davievegas on Apr 29, 2015 23:04:09 GMT 1, I understand what you are saying but you must be intelligent enough to realize that larger editions of prints are a way that art lovers/collectors who can't afford some artists' originals can obtain their works. Also print houses aren't the only ones cashing in on print releases. Some artists themselves are making cash hand over fist too. As a recent example let's use JJ Adams, not someone I collect or respect but you get my meaning I'm sure. Additionally, there are many more artists doing the same thing which begs the question, shouldn't we hold certain artist responsible for driving the market of these multiple larger releases as well as the print houses? It all boils down to supply and demand. If the demand is there it will be supplied by many(but not all) artist. I believe this is exactly what made Bansky stop producing art. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he just get sick of it all? However, at the same time it's hard to blame artists for their success, as we all know some artists never get it no matter how good they are. Although I may not agree with it, I do understand the get it while you can mentality. It is a quandary. Makes me wonder if there is just too much art and art business out there. Really makes me appreciate Banksy more and more. I am not against Large editions at all, I think there is a definite need for them in exactly the case you mention where an artists orginals are out of range for most and collectors get a chance to be a part of owning something by the artist. But what the Hype in this genre has done is throw normal rules and thresholds out the door. Prints are more expensive and of larger editions even when an artists originals are not out of range for average collectors. I dont know the exact formula for pricing an edition but last time I released a print release it was based off what originals cost and affordable for collectors. I think a good printer does this for the artists and understands the need to keep things organic. But some use the demand to increase prices substantially and create variants to increase demand also. I am not sure of this new math where a 15K release relates to far more than what the original sells for. And that is why I put some of the blame on the printhouses because they know the formulas to price these prints yet they choose to ignore them and create these bubbles which have short term gains. From personal experience when it comes to artists pricing their work even the best have a hard time knowing what they should charge, and because of this I know the influence a printhouse could have on artists that most likely give in to the advise of others thus increasing prices. I have worked with great artists that do understand pricing and they keep the slow path leading to a natural rise even when hyped. Just look at the printhouses in it for the longrun most have kept a model of prices consistent even when demand is strong, compared to others who raise prices and editions based on demand. I guess its a different business strategy.
Even if its for one or two years only. When you get too big of an ego, I feel artists forget that the main purpose is to have people collect your work. All I see is artists selling recent work for thousands of dollars and what they don't realize is that most people either cant afford it or do not want to spend thousands on art. Exposure is the biggest part of being an artist and when you stop thinking of the buyer and it becomes all about fattening artists pockets, it becomes a problem. I think that is why people like new artists. Its affordable and collectors like the work and it looks good on peoples walls in there home. Just my opinion.
The approach for each artist matters. Wether they take the path of how artists did it back in the day or how they cut corners because they can. With social media now a days, you do not need to be an artist who goes all over the world and murals walls for exposure. Brainwash is a prime example. He has the whole celebrity community and he goes to ALL the parties which gives him the most exposure. He is on rappers songs. He is catering and meeting the right people who will BUY his work for thousands. Its all about how you market yourself.
His son Hijack even did a exposure only show here in vegas at a big club. No matter how you feel about Hijack and Brainwash, it shows the marketing skill of some artists and the right connections they have to become successful.
www.xslasvegas.com/high_society/exhibit.html
BTW, i know how everyone feels about Brainwash. So what i said was just an example. I have not been in the art collecting game for as long as a lot of you. I do know why he is frowned upon. So don't cut my head off for using him as a example. My post is more about the new ways artists are dong things then the old ways.
I understand what you are saying but you must be intelligent enough to realize that larger editions of prints are a way that art lovers/collectors who can't afford some artists' originals can obtain their works. Also print houses aren't the only ones cashing in on print releases. Some artists themselves are making cash hand over fist too. As a recent example let's use JJ Adams, not someone I collect or respect but you get my meaning I'm sure. Additionally, there are many more artists doing the same thing which begs the question, shouldn't we hold certain artist responsible for driving the market of these multiple larger releases as well as the print houses? It all boils down to supply and demand. If the demand is there it will be supplied by many(but not all) artist. I believe this is exactly what made Bansky stop producing art. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he just get sick of it all? However, at the same time it's hard to blame artists for their success, as we all know some artists never get it no matter how good they are. Although I may not agree with it, I do understand the get it while you can mentality. It is a quandary. Makes me wonder if there is just too much art and art business out there. Really makes me appreciate Banksy more and more. I am not against Large editions at all, I think there is a definite need for them in exactly the case you mention where an artists orginals are out of range for most and collectors get a chance to be a part of owning something by the artist. But what the Hype in this genre has done is throw normal rules and thresholds out the door. Prints are more expensive and of larger editions even when an artists originals are not out of range for average collectors. I dont know the exact formula for pricing an edition but last time I released a print release it was based off what originals cost and affordable for collectors. I think a good printer does this for the artists and understands the need to keep things organic. But some use the demand to increase prices substantially and create variants to increase demand also. I am not sure of this new math where a 15K release relates to far more than what the original sells for. And that is why I put some of the blame on the printhouses because they know the formulas to price these prints yet they choose to ignore them and create these bubbles which have short term gains. From personal experience when it comes to artists pricing their work even the best have a hard time knowing what they should charge, and because of this I know the influence a printhouse could have on artists that most likely give in to the advise of others thus increasing prices. I have worked with great artists that do understand pricing and they keep the slow path leading to a natural rise even when hyped. Just look at the printhouses in it for the longrun most have kept a model of prices consistent even when demand is strong, compared to others who raise prices and editions based on demand. I guess its a different business strategy. I feel Mr Brainwash changed how artists do/did things to the point that the whole outlook on street art is twisted now. Before brainwash, you had people that put in 10 years of working the streets and putting the work all over walls across the world etc to build a name. Once brainwash came in and cut ALL of that out and sold out in his first show. It was over. No matter how he did it. Now "Hyped" artists are around more then ever. But think of it this way. These same "Hyped" artists still have the chance to feel what is it like to be an artist that sells. Wether its prints or originals that are affordable. Even if its for one or two years only. When you get too big of an ego, I feel artists forget that the main purpose is to have people collect your work. All I see is artists selling recent work for thousands of dollars and what they don't realize is that most people either cant afford it or do not want to spend thousands on art. Exposure is the biggest part of being an artist and when you stop thinking of the buyer and it becomes all about fattening artists pockets, it becomes a problem. I think that is why people like new artists. Its affordable and collectors like the work and it looks good on peoples walls in there home. Just my opinion. The approach for each artist matters. Wether they take the path of how artists did it back in the day or how they cut corners because they can. With social media now a days, you do not need to be an artist who goes all over the world and murals walls for exposure. Brainwash is a prime example. He has the whole celebrity community and he goes to ALL the parties which gives him the most exposure. He is on rappers songs. He is catering and meeting the right people who will BUY his work for thousands. Its all about how you market yourself. His son Hijack even did a exposure only show here in vegas at a big club. No matter how you feel about Hijack and Brainwash, it shows the marketing skill of some artists and the right connections they have to become successful. www.xslasvegas.com/high_society/exhibit.htmlBTW, i know how everyone feels about Brainwash. So what i said was just an example. I have not been in the art collecting game for as long as a lot of you. I do know why he is frowned upon. So don't cut my head off for using him as a example. My post is more about the new ways artists are dong things then the old ways. |
|
๐ธ