Urban Art Association

Bonhams Prints and Multiples 8th June, by met on Jun 9, 2016 15:22:51 GMT 1,

Jun 9, 2016 6:13:19 GMT 1 onetwothree said:

Jun 9, 2016 4:04:55 GMT 1 met said:

I suspect the relatively low price was largely down to the print being described as outside of the regular edition, and the latter being of an unknown size.

It may in part be due to medium as well. A C-type print is just a photograph (made from a digital file as opposed to a negative).

I'd think if outside the main edition/AP would be more sortafter.

If the photograph had been specifically marked by the artist as an artist's proof, I would agree with you in part.

But as described by Bonhams ("aside from the edition of an unknown size"), it seems to be merely a signed photo from an authorised overrun.

The main issue is that the regular edition appears to be unnumbered and its size is unknown. It cannot therefore be accurately referred to as a limited edition. The uncertainty and lack of transparency on the number of prints in existence will have put off many potential buyers — because a crucial factor in collecting, i.e. rarity, can't be determined.

This same photo was bought in / unsold at a previous Bonhams auction this year, the Prints and Multiples sale in Knightsbridge on 23 March 2016. It failed to reach the reserve price, which was at most £600, being the low estimate for that sale:

www.bonhams.com/auctions/23544/lot/319/

---------

The above is a longwinded attempt to make a more general point:

Before buying art from dealers or bidding at auction, I would always strongly encourage new collectors to research, research, research.

Jun 9, 2016 6:13:19 GMT 1 onetwothree said:

Jun 9, 2016 4:04:55 GMT 1 met said:

I suspect the relatively low price was largely down to the print being described as outside of the regular edition, and the latter being of an unknown size.

It may in part be due to medium as well. A C-type print is just a photograph (made from a digital file as opposed to a negative).

I'd think if outside the main edition/AP would be more sortafter.

If the photograph had been specifically marked by the artist as an artist's proof, I would agree with you in part.

But as described by Bonhams ("aside from the edition of an unknown size"), it seems to be merely a signed photo from an authorised overrun.

The main issue is that the regular edition appears to be unnumbered and its size is unknown. It cannot therefore be accurately referred to as a limited edition. The uncertainty and lack of transparency on the number of prints in existence will have put off many potential buyers — because a crucial factor in collecting, i.e. rarity, can't be determined.

This same photo was bought in / unsold at a previous Bonhams auction this year, the Prints and Multiples sale in Knightsbridge on 23 March 2016. It failed to reach the reserve price, which was at most £600, being the low estimate for that sale:

www.bonhams.com/auctions/23544/lot/319/

---------

The above is a longwinded attempt to make a more general point:

Before buying art from dealers or bidding at auction, I would always strongly encourage new collectors to research, research, research.