Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Art Galleries  (Read 4725 times)
Dan Sroka
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


WWW
« on: July 15, 2003, 02:54:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Did this gallery sell photography? They might have no experience in it, and therefore have a bias against digital work. Galleries are simply retail stores for art. Each gallery owner (or, shop keeper) sets up the wares that they want to sell, think will sell, etc. You have to make sure that any gallery you approach actually sells the type of work you do. Look for a place that sells work that you'd like to have as company, and approach them.

Also, I'd recommend approaching them yourself. From my understanding, many gallery owners dislike going through a middleman, and this could have swayed her response.

Dan
Logged
BobTrips
Guest
« Reply #1 on: July 16, 2003, 12:19:56 PM »
ReplyReply

It's my guess that if one needed to quickly locate a pretentious person an art gallery would be an excellent place to start looking.

Sometimes the qualifying person will be the owner, sometimes a patron.

In the beginning digital prints were not good. They earned the reputation that still lingers past the development of quality printers, paper and ink.

Lots of people are still walking around with throw away statements such as 'digital prints aren't REAL photographs'. The most pretentious of those will most likely be the last to come around.

As an exhibiting/selling photographer I would suggest that you work out a strategy to help the owner come around.

For example, present your work without reference to how it was photographed or printed. Make them bring up the question. They'll have to look at your work before they look at your technique.

Perhaps mix in some true film prints with your digital. If the gallery owner can quickly sort them out maybe he/she is on to something. Use that information to improve your digital work.

If you get turned down because you're 'digital', I'd suggest you leave some samples of your work behind. A couple of nice 5"x7"s or 8"x10"s with your name/contact info on the back, perhaps. Some owners are going to be open minded enough to take a second or third look. Especially if they aren't placed in the potentially embarrassing position of being observed doing so.

Once the owners have accepted your work it's going to hang on the wall. Most people will purchase because they like the work. They don't really care how it was done.

It will take time for the 'investor-buyer' to accept digital. Lots of investing is not back up by rational decision making. Look at the tulip bubble of years past or the 'dot-com' bubble of more recent time.

The value of a print or other work of art is not tied to anything 'real'. Not like a bushel of corn (which you can eat). The monetary value of art is based on the expectation of what someone else would pay for the work.
Logged
poliwog
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2003, 07:49:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi!

And these clown sell Jackson Pollack. His works fall apart after a few years and have to be restored because he used housepaint-- or so a knowledgeable person once told me.

Les
Logged
pedz
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77



WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 15, 2003, 01:34:00 PM »
ReplyReply

This is only one data point.  I had a friend contact a local art gallery here in Austin about showing my photography.  It was interesting that a friend did it and not me because I think a lot more information came out as a result.

Although the gallery manager said that she was open, if you cut through all the rational, you come to her belief that digital photography can not be fine art.  At least, that is how I interpret what I heard.  My friend still points out that the manager said she was open.  In any case, digital fine art photography, in the manager's perspective, is starting out in a weakened position.

It is curious some of the manager's justification to this -- but I'll not go into that.

My question is, how often have others encountered this belief that digital photography is not and can not be fine art by gallery managers or owners?
Logged

pedz
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77



WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 16, 2003, 02:48:28 AM »
ReplyReply

They had at least two artists with photographs.  All of them B+W.  One artist had gelatin silver prints.  I'm not sure about the others.  Your point about picking galleries that displays work that I would like to have as company is well taken.  I was not able to appriciate any of the artists they had displayed.
Logged

Marshal
Guest
« Reply #5 on: July 23, 2003, 01:40:19 AM »
ReplyReply

I haven't had any problems selling my digital work, but perhaps it was because the prints I've sold repeatedly the last 3 years have mostly been of a popular and historic local landmark that everyone wants to have. They're not picky about the print type, but simply want a copy of the image. A couple hours spent in the town square one night has paid off handsomely in many ways ever since.

In Carmel, CA or NY, NY however, I would expect it to be somewhat different. But don't worry, the pompous, pretentious curators and fine "arteests" will eventually come around. It's not a matter of if, but when. Digital printers like George DeWolfe and many others are breaking down barriers already with their quadtone prints for example.
Logged
pcg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 96


« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2003, 11:19:03 AM »
ReplyReply

I ran across this same attitude last week in Massachusetts. A gallery owner in Boston stated that 'digital prints' wouldn't last more than a year, and that selling such schlock would be a crime. She concluded by saying that 'real artists' didn't use point-and-shoots, ie, digital cameras, and that even discussing it was ridiculous... I spent some time, to say the least, educating this woman. Her biases were no different than many religious or racial biases. Pretention and mystery are terribly important to galleries. It's become a common mantra by these Luddites that digital cannot produce Art. They've forgotten that it's the image that counts, not the technique.
Logged
collum
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 189


WWW
« Reply #7 on: August 05, 2003, 08:50:15 AM »
ReplyReply

well.. photography west doesn't accept digital, but if you walk a few blocks, the Weston gallery has no problems with it.

many of the top 'traditional' west coast photographers are moving to digital.. printing or capture.  i read a list recently, and was quite surprised at who was. i'll see if i can find it again

    jim
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad