Urban Art Association

Yeah I guess price does play a big part. That may be for another thread though... Release price is instant secondary market price.

Agreed. Shep's prints are $45...Fridriks are ~$1k. You could buy 4-5 months worth of Shep's prints for the cost of one Fridriks. I do think the frequency of past print releases also plays a huge role though. I think the problem with Fridriks is that in the past her print releases seem to have been really spread out and then Avante released 5 prints in the past ~9 months--that's ~$5k in 9 months if you bought them all. Plus the more prints that are out there, the less money people seem willing to pay for prints on the secondary market and--as much as we'd love to think that it shouldn't matter--it definitely has an effect on whether or not people decide to purchase a print this expensive.

I'm one of the people who wishes that the releases were a bit more spaced out, but mainly because I'm a little jealous that I can't afford the new ones.  

For me it’s all about offer and demand. If you’re a big fan of someone’s work and you sit there on release trying to get a print you don’t want to have to wait a whole year if you miss out. So if the edition size is enough so I can get one for sure 1 a year is OK for me but if I have to be really lucky to get one I would rather have more than 1 chance every 12 months

The question is impossible to answer as it’s homogenising a massive group. How do you even define a print? Is a Grayson Perry scarf in a box a print or what about a work with just one screen incorporated into an original work? It’s such a broad medium.

I think the question you’re aiming to get a response to is how many prints, which are limited in number should a reasonably successful mid ranking urban or contemporary artist release at their market value before they saturate their market and damage their career? Again even that’s practically impossible to answer. As previous posts have pointed out Fairey’s model is for everyone to have one, likewise Mr Brainwash is a kind of expensive Ikea approach to prints.

If I had to put a number, I’d ask what does the print add to that artist’s work? For example does the print link to a new show or even a wall. Or is the print just another cash grab knocked up on photoshop.

1 print per year is plenty

42.

500

Do you have any examples of an artist who only lists a small batch of prints once every two years?

I don't see how that is sustainable as an artist

way too many variables to answer ...  it depends on:

(1) edition size of releases
(2) price
(3) artist fanbase / following
(4) actual image / art
(5) artist style / progression / themes
(6) how active the artist is with new murals, exhibits, shows, fairs, etc

generally, it just boils down to supply & demand.  keep enough people interested but don't oversaturate the market where there's more supply than demand.  it's hard to argue with artists releasing too much when the releases sell out rather rapidly.  i personally think less is better for established artists.  some artists release too many meh or subpar images.  prefer prints be of higher quality images that are more iconic of the artist style and a snapshot of where their work is at the time.

For some artists, and for that matter, some collectors, it’s not all about prints.
Some artist make their living by painting or creating originals - commissions, having gallery shows or selling originals online.

I think for most artists, that's the case. They make their money, and build their reputation, on originals, not prints. 

In my experience, it's those with collections primarily built of prints that are usually the loudest complainers of an artist releasing too many prints.

I don’t disagree with a word of this, and hope that you don’t think that my post was belittling the art of print making. I was responding to a particular question regarding artists who do few prints.
Bottom line is it’s no one’s place to tell an artist that they are making too many (or too few) prints.

Not really, but it’s interesting to see peoples expectations of an artists print releases. I personally would prefer to see quality rather than quantity but with a higher edition size so everybody gets the opportunity to own one without having to pay a premium off of somebody that has no interest in either the artist or the art.

I agree. My question is to start some discussion which appears to have done which is good.

The question came in response to numerous posts ive seen call artists car grabbers, cash cows , etc etc. It made me wonder why such the negative comments.