As an artist, a major hurdle that keeps me from selling my work is pricing it. Sounds silly, but I have a hard time finding the medium between “free” and “not for sale.” I would love to make a living with my art, but I struggle with also wishing to make fine art available to people of all income brackets.
As luck would have it, Reed A. Prescott III lectured on this very topic at Artists’ Mediums in Williston, Vermont. Mr. Prescott approached the topic with the common sense of a businessman, or in Prescott’s case, of a full-time artist.
A myth that he worked to dispel was that the price of a work should be such so it will sell quickly. By artificially lowering the price to accommodate a market, an artist can unwittingly devalue their works, as well as the works of every other artist, and possibly even undercut the galleries representing them.
The total price is equivalent to what is needed to make a livable wage and support the sales process. It is comprised of two pieces roughly valued at 50% of the total price each. The first component of pricing takes into account the cost of materials, time invested in research and development and creation, overhead and even medical insurance. The second component concerns the actual marketing and selling of a piece. The 50/50 rule is important to remember especially when applied to the principles of consignment, keystone, and wholesale and pricing structures.
The common principle price structures will be covered in Part 2.
It’s really a shame that an artist can’t make a living by selling his or her work to those who are less privileged. Everyone can appreciate artwork, but only a select few can cut a check for $10,000 to buy a painting. The rest of us have to live with reproductions or posters.
That’s one of the moral dilemmas that an artist must face. Should your customers and patrons include members of your own community? What about donating your work for a benefit or cause that you believe in (given tax write-off limitations)? How does following your conscious effect one’s ability to earn a living?
I don’t have any good answers to these questions, other than I feel it is important for everyone to have access to original pieces. How feasible is it to make many small works available at prices that my neighbors could afford? Could I keep up with demand? How could I later entice them to invest in larger pieces? For the collectors interested only in returns on their investments, how could I ensure that value of my works will only increase?
I’m still trying to work all of this out myself. Ultimately, I feel it is imperative to remain true to one’s ideals, dreams and goals and not give in to the pull of money.
I love this: “A myth that he worked to dispel was that the price of a work should be such so it will sell quickly.”
Amen! If you don’t value your work, no one will. Thanks for posting. I look forward to Part II.
While I agree with Courtney about community, I have taken the approach that there are different markets: Originals vs. reproductions. While I give many pieces away to benefit the community I have filled the lower end- me and my friends- market with reproductions. The idea is that you do not want to create a demand you can not fill by doing originals too inexpensively. There needs to be a separation between repros and originals. You do not want the repros to create a demand for the originals. You also have the intellectual property of the original image, for which I have sold limited rights for puzzles, calendars, debit cards, etc. Making money on the use of the image. With all this, the point I was trying to make was that you need to pay yourself for all that you do. A gallery gets paid to sell your work and so should you…