antman
New Member
🗨️ 47
👍🏻 10
August 2013
|
$1000 Conor Harrington New York Print, by antman on Sept 30, 2014 0:18:13 GMT 1, One just sold for 810 USD on the bay...
One just sold for 810 USD on the bay...
|
|
vei
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,830
👍🏻 975
February 2013
|
$1000 Conor Harrington New York Print, by vei on Sept 30, 2014 0:29:22 GMT 1, Really !!!!! What was the listing number?
Really !!!!! What was the listing number?
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
$1000 Conor Harrington New York Print, by Deleted on Sept 30, 2014 3:24:34 GMT 1, One just sold for 810 USD on the bay...
One just sold for 810 USD on the bay... Not seeing that either. Sure you're not referring to the one with 2 bids at $810? Still some days left on that. |
|
alittle
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,575
👍🏻 1,315
November 2012
|
$1000 Conor Harrington New York Print, by alittle on Sept 30, 2014 3:45:04 GMT 1, I don't get the flipper hate...get mad at the artist for releasing their work well below market prices. If artists priced their work "properly", there wouldn't be any opportunity to make money in the extreme short term.
I don't get the flipper hate...get mad at the artist for releasing their work well below market prices. If artists priced their work "properly", there wouldn't be any opportunity to make money in the extreme short term.
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
$1000 Conor Harrington New York Print, by Deleted on Sept 30, 2014 3:48:58 GMT 1, I don't get the flipper hate...get mad at the artist for releasing their work well below market prices. If artists priced their work "properly", there wouldn't be any opportunity to make money in the extreme short term.
I don't get the flipper hate...get mad at the artist for releasing their work well below market prices. If artists priced their work "properly", there wouldn't be any opportunity to make money in the extreme short term. There's no winning argument. It's very hard to gauge the market value of a print before release (just look at the value of the Unveiling vs. the NYC print). And if you raise the price to a certain amount, you're essentially creating classist art where only certain groups of people can afford (i.e. that difference between $400 and $900 is a big deal for many fans). Can't win. |
|
whl10
New Member
🗨️ 407
👍🏻 131
November 2010
|
$1000 Conor Harrington New York Print, by whl10 on Sept 30, 2014 4:07:28 GMT 1, One just sold for 810 USD on the bay...
saw it as well
One just sold for 810 USD on the bay... That was for 'the unveiling' saw it as well |
|
|
|
alittle
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,575
👍🏻 1,315
November 2012
|
$1000 Conor Harrington New York Print, by alittle on Sept 30, 2014 4:22:48 GMT 1, I don't get the flipper hate...get mad at the artist for releasing their work well below market prices. If artists priced their work "properly", there wouldn't be any opportunity to make money in the extreme short term. There's no winning argument. It's very hard to gauge the market value of a print before release (just look at the value of the Unveiling vs. the NYC print). And if you raise the price to a certain amount, you're essentially creating classist art where only certain groups of people can afford (i.e. that difference between $400 and $900 is a big deal for many fans). Can't win.
If I were an artist, this is what I would do:
1. Continue to release low edition limited prints at perceived market rate for "serious" collectors
2. Offer timed limited edition prints for more "casual" collectors
3. Offer open edition prints for anyone who may like the picture, but doesn't fancy themselves a collector.
I don't get the flipper hate...get mad at the artist for releasing their work well below market prices. If artists priced their work "properly", there wouldn't be any opportunity to make money in the extreme short term. There's no winning argument. It's very hard to gauge the market value of a print before release (just look at the value of the Unveiling vs. the NYC print). And if you raise the price to a certain amount, you're essentially creating classist art where only certain groups of people can afford (i.e. that difference between $400 and $900 is a big deal for many fans). Can't win. If I were an artist, this is what I would do: 1. Continue to release low edition limited prints at perceived market rate for "serious" collectors 2. Offer timed limited edition prints for more "casual" collectors 3. Offer open edition prints for anyone who may like the picture, but doesn't fancy themselves a collector. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
$1000 Conor Harrington New York Print, by Deleted on Sept 30, 2014 5:55:16 GMT 1, There's no winning argument. It's very hard to gauge the market value of a print before release (just look at the value of the Unveiling vs. the NYC print). And if you raise the price to a certain amount, you're essentially creating classist art where only certain groups of people can afford (i.e. that difference between $400 and $900 is a big deal for many fans). Can't win. If I were an artist, this is what I would do: 1. Continue to release low edition limited prints at perceived market rate for "serious" collectors 2. Offer timed limited edition prints for more "casual" collectors 3. Offer open edition prints for anyone who may like the picture, but doesn't fancy themselves a collector.
I can't really argue against timed releases; I think more artists should do that.
I feel like an open edition usually doesn't work out, or people find themselves not wanting it, especially if it is of the same image that has a limited version. My main example would be Etam Cru's 'Moonshine' open edition; I don't know anyone who purchased that, and it's still readily available, yet people seem frequently willing to buy the limited/signed for 10x the price.
There's no winning argument. It's very hard to gauge the market value of a print before release (just look at the value of the Unveiling vs. the NYC print). And if you raise the price to a certain amount, you're essentially creating classist art where only certain groups of people can afford (i.e. that difference between $400 and $900 is a big deal for many fans). Can't win. If I were an artist, this is what I would do: 1. Continue to release low edition limited prints at perceived market rate for "serious" collectors 2. Offer timed limited edition prints for more "casual" collectors 3. Offer open edition prints for anyone who may like the picture, but doesn't fancy themselves a collector. I can't really argue against timed releases; I think more artists should do that. I feel like an open edition usually doesn't work out, or people find themselves not wanting it, especially if it is of the same image that has a limited version. My main example would be Etam Cru's 'Moonshine' open edition; I don't know anyone who purchased that, and it's still readily available, yet people seem frequently willing to buy the limited/signed for 10x the price. |
|
alittle
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,575
👍🏻 1,315
November 2012
|
$1000 Conor Harrington New York Print, by alittle on Sept 30, 2014 6:33:11 GMT 1, coller, for each class listed, I would release different images.
As for your comment about people not wanting an open edition, that kind of goes against what you said you would like to prevent; classist art. While you as a collector may not want an open edition, some who is not a collector but thinks the image is pretty would appreciate one as the cost would be lower than both the limited edition and the timed print releases. If you want to be able to have your art accessible to everyone, I think open editions are a great tool.
coller, for each class listed, I would release different images. As for your comment about people not wanting an open edition, that kind of goes against what you said you would like to prevent; classist art. While you as a collector may not want an open edition, some who is not a collector but thinks the image is pretty would appreciate one as the cost would be lower than both the limited edition and the timed print releases. If you want to be able to have your art accessible to everyone, I think open editions are a great tool.
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
$1000 Conor Harrington New York Print, by Deleted on Sept 30, 2014 6:39:19 GMT 1, coller, for each class listed, I would release different images. As for your comment about people not wanting an open edition, that kind of goes against what you said you would like to prevent; classist art. While you as a collector may not want an open edition, some who is not a collector but thinks the image is pretty would appreciate one as the cost would be lower than both the limited edition and the timed print releases. If you want to be able to have your art accessible to everyone, I think open editions are a great tool.
I agree. I thought you were leaning more towards open editions of images that had already been sold as previous editions. A purely open edition would be a great way for every fan to have something from the artist. On the other hand, having an image that has both limited and open editions is almost inherently classist.
coller, for each class listed, I would release different images. As for your comment about people not wanting an open edition, that kind of goes against what you said you would like to prevent; classist art. While you as a collector may not want an open edition, some who is not a collector but thinks the image is pretty would appreciate one as the cost would be lower than both the limited edition and the timed print releases. If you want to be able to have your art accessible to everyone, I think open editions are a great tool. I agree. I thought you were leaning more towards open editions of images that had already been sold as previous editions. A purely open edition would be a great way for every fan to have something from the artist. On the other hand, having an image that has both limited and open editions is almost inherently classist. |
|
