Ethical question about art galleries
Tony W.
prints and it buys prints from me periodically.
A man bought three of my prints from the gallery.
The man later asked the gallery owner where he could get a particular
painting of mine, which he had seen at the gallery in print form
(because I reproduced the painting in an art print edition). The gallery
owner knew that the painting was consigned at another gallery in town,
and he referred the customer to that gallery.The customer went to that
gallery and bought the painting, which means I'm going to get some money
for the sale of the painting.
The next day, the customer found my Web site -- which he says was his
own idea -- and not a suggestion by the staff at either of the
galleries. He then emailed me through my Web site to ask if he could buy
another painting -- one which my Web site shows and describes as being
available for sale at my studio.
Should I pay a commission to the first gallery for the painting that the
customer wants to buy from me? That gallery has been trying to get my
paintings for quite a while and I had been thinking of showing some of
them there. The gallery would charge a 40 percent commission on my
paintings if I consigned my paintings there.
Tina Mammoser
other galleries but did find his own way to contact you directly. Your web
prices should be the same as your gallery prices so it doesn't appear
you're undercutting your galleries. I might consider maybe a 10% finders
fee to the first gallery but it isn't necessary (and they need never know
about the web sale). Recommending a customer visit another gallery is
really good of them but it wasn't a direct recommendation to your websit. I
have given my gallery 10% because they were kind enough to open up my
studio when I wasn't there to show someone work and they recommend my work
if people are looking for something abstract and there's nothing
appropriate in the gallery (by the way, they do have permission to go into
my studio). But they don't ask for the fee.
At the very least I'd ring them to thank them for recommending the other
gallery and let them know the customer was very happy. It's a great time to
start giving them a few paintings now if their actions have resulted in a
painting sale elsewhere. :)
Tina
--
********************
--Colorist expressionist contemporary landscapes direct from the artist!--
HTTP://WWW.TINA-M.COM
mailto:ti...@tina-m.com
-----Limited editions and original prints from London artists!-----
HTTP://WWW.BRIGHTNEWART.COM
mailto:ti...@brightnewart.com
********************
C. Enna
>
>I deal with a gallery that does a great job of representing my art
>prints and it buys prints from me periodically.
(snipped)
Do you have a written contract with the
gallery? If not, then whatever oral
agreement you have is binding, ethically.
Galleries that insist of artists signing
formal contracts will usually spell out the conditions
under which the artist can sell themself,
or through other galleries.
There is an 'unwritten' artist code that
says you SHOULD pay the gallery that
represents you a commission if you sell
the work yourself. I don't know how widespread
the adherence to that code is.
Tony W.
>
> Personally, I think it's up to you. The customer found you through the
> other galleries but did find his own way to contact you directly.
Thanks, Tina.
I feel indebted to the first gallery because it's improbable that the
customer would be contacting me now to discuss buying my painting if it
weren't for the promotion of my work that the gallery has done.
> Your web
> prices should be the same as your gallery prices so it doesn't appear
> you're undercutting your galleries.
The prices are the same.
I might consider maybe a 10% finders
> fee to the first gallery but it isn't necessary (and they need never know
> about the web sale).
The gallery is going to find out about the sale of the painting (if I do
make the sale to the customer) because the customer told me he's going
to take the painting of mine that he bought (and the painting of mine
that he's considering buying -- if he buys it -- to the gallery to be framed.
Recommending a customer visit another gallery is
> really good of them but it wasn't a direct recommendation to your websit. I
> have given my gallery 10% because they were kind enough to open up my
> studio when I wasn't there to show someone work and they recommend my work
> if people are looking for something abstract and there's nothing
> appropriate in the gallery (by the way, they do have permission to go into
> my studio). But they don't ask for the fee.
>
> At the very least I'd ring them to thank them for recommending the other
> gallery and let them know the customer was very happy. It's a great time to
> start giving them a few paintings now if their actions have resulted in a
> painting sale elsewhere. :)
That's a good idea and I'm planning to do that, especially because I've
found that the three galleries that I have my paintings consigned to are
all operated by crooks who have each tried several times to rip me off,
whereas the gallery owner that I feel indebted to has been treating me
very well.
Neil Maxwell
wrote:
>The next day, the customer found my Web site -- which he says was his
>own idea -- and not a suggestion by the staff at either of the
>galleries. He then emailed me through my Web site to ask if he could buy
>another painting -- one which my Web site shows and describes as being
>available for sale at my studio.
Did you pay a commission to the first gallery for sending the customer
to the second gallery? This seems like the only potential commission
obligation here, and it seems like it's not ethically required, but
would be a nice relationship touch.
Had one of the galleries sent the customer to your web site, that
would be worth considering a commission on. However, if he found it
on his own, it sounds as if there's no ethical obligation to pay a
commission to either gallery, since your web site is offering the
painting on your own behalf, with no involvement of the galleries.
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
Tony W.
>
> In article <3E7FFF1B...@hotmail.com>, ton...@hotmail.com says...
> >
> >I deal with a gallery that does a great job of representing my art
> >prints and it buys prints from me periodically.
>
> (snipped)
>
> Do you have a written contract with the
> gallery? If not, then whatever oral
> agreement you have is binding, ethically.
I don't have a written or oral contract with the gallery. I just sell a
few prints to it every few months.
> Galleries that insist of artists signing
> formal contracts will usually spell out the conditions
> under which the artist can sell themself,
> or through other galleries.
I don't have written contracts with any of the galleries that I deal
with, that spell out the conditions under which I can sell myself or
through other galleries.
> There is an 'unwritten' artist code that
> says you SHOULD pay the gallery that
> represents you a commission if you sell
> the work yourself. I don't know how widespread
> the adherence to that code is.
So do you think that if the customer buys the painting from me, I should
pay the gallery a forty percent commission? Forty percent is the
commission that the gallery charges artists for selling art.
Thanks, C.
Tony W.
>
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 07:00:23 GMT, "Tony W." <ton...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >The next day, the customer found my Web site -- which he says was his
> >own idea -- and not a suggestion by the staff at either of the
> >galleries. He then emailed me through my Web site to ask if he could buy
> >another painting -- one which my Web site shows and describes as being
> >available for sale at my studio.
>
> Did you pay a commission to the first gallery for sending the customer
> to the second gallery?
No. The painting just sold three days ago and I'm trying to decide how
to handle the situation.
> This seems like the only potential commission
> obligation here, and it seems like it's not ethically required, but
> would be a nice relationship touch.
Regarding that painting that was sold, the gallery that sold it is
charging a 50 percent commission, so that means I'd be paying a second
commission to the gallery that referred the customer to the gallery
where the painting was bought.
It's nice that the painting was sold now, but I'm confident that someone
would have bought it eventually because of the good reception it's been
getting, so I would rather have waited for the painting to sell and pay
a 50 percent commission, than to sell the painting now and have to pay
the 50 percent commission to the gallery that sells the painting, plus
an additional commission -- perhaps of 10, 20, 30 or 40 percent -- to
the referring gallery. The painting sold for $2,500, so even a 10
percent additional commission would amount to $250, which is a lot to a
nearly starving artist like myself.
> Had one of the galleries sent the customer to your web site, that
> would be worth considering a commission on. However, if he found it
> on his own, it sounds as if there's no ethical obligation to pay a
> commission to either gallery, since your web site is offering the
> painting on your own behalf, with no involvement of the galleries.
>
> Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
The customer found my Web site on his own (meaning without being
referred to it by one of the galleries) but it's unlikely that he would
have found my Web site at this time if he hadn't first discovered my art
through one of the galleries, where he started to collect my work. So he
found my Web site indirectly through one of the galleries, and that
makes it difficult for me to decide if I owe the first gallery a commission.
Thanks, Neil
C. Enna
>I don't have a written or oral contract with the gallery. I just sell a
>few prints to it every few months.
>So do you think that if the customer buys the painting from me, I should
>pay the gallery a forty percent commission? Forty percent is the
>commission that the gallery charges artists for selling art.
>
>Thanks, C.
Based on your first paragraph above, you seem
to have nothing 'on commission' with the
gallery so I'd have to say the usual
gallery/artist relationship does not
exist here. I see no reason, if that is
the case, for you to pay the gallery anything.
I assume if you are selling your prints to
them at some fixed price they can then mark
them up to whatever the market will bear and
they in turn pay you nothing more than the
fixed price already paid?
Tony W.
In almost all cases, they mark up the price by 100 percent, which is the
industry standard for galleries that buy prints.
If they frame the prints, then they can charge whatever they want or
whatever the market will bear.
Thanks., C.
Tony
Tony W.
I'm sure the gallery owner will be upset, though.
Today I'm going to that gallery to fill an order the gallery owner made
for some of my prints, and to try to sell him my new prints as well. One
of the new prints I'm going to show him is a giclée of the same image as
the painting.
I'm sure the gallery owner's going to say he wants to have the paintings
consigned at his gallery, because he loves my art and is an ardent
supporter of it and has proposed several times to have an exhibition of
my paintings at his gallery.
So what am I supposed to say to the gallery owner, "Sorry; you can't
have that painting, because I'm selling it to your customer who bought
three of my framed prints at your gallery, after your customer contacted
me privately?"
The gallery owner will find out if I sell the painting to that customer
because they seem to be friends and the customer says he's that if he
buys this second painting of mine, he's going to take both paintings to
that gallery to get consistent framing with each other and with the
three of my prints that he already has in his house.
I'm sure that the gallery owner will feel as if I've bypassed him by
selling directly to his customer without sharing the profit.
Tony W.
Doesn't anyone else have anything to add to this, or are you all too
busy arguing about politics?
I want opinions from more people, please.
Help!
Tony
Lauren Foster-MacLeod
>
> Doesn't anyone else have anything to add to this, or are you all too
> busy arguing about politics?
> I want opinions from more people, please.
> Help!
Since you asked...
I just want to clarify something. I while back in this thread, do I
remember you writing that you have your work in more than one gallery in
the city where you live? If this is so, and all of these galleries know
that you are doing this, and don't have a problem with it, then I would
use that as the precedent of what to do.
I have a friend who has her work sold through her dealer/art gallery in
Toronto, where she lives. He has given her solo shows, and promotes her
work, and gets a commission. Now, she was wondering what to do when she
sells work herself, through her own work and steam, outside of Toronto
(like, getting her work into shows in galleries in other cities in other
provinces), and when the dealer has nothing to do with it. She wants to be
fair with her dealer, who has stuck by her, helped promote her, and is
also a good friend. She decided to say that he represents her "in Toronto"
and that she represents herself in, like, "Vancouver" when she has done
all the work to get her work shown there. At least, that was her plan when
I last spoke to her. Next time we're talking, I'll ask her how it's going.
Lauren
--
THE BLESSED BEE
www.blessedbee.com
samples/subscription info:
in...@blessedbee.com
Newt Gray
says...
>She decided to say that he represents her "in Toronto"
>and that she represents herself in, like, "Vancouver" when she has done
>all the work to get her work shown there. At least, that was her plan when
>I last spoke to her. Next time we're talking, I'll ask her how it's going.
>
>Lauren
I've run into all sorts of problems with a
variety of galleries representing me over
the years, all due to the lack of a written
contract, or a poorly written one, or one
that only protects the gallery's interests
and not the artist's.
I don't know the legals in Canada but in
the USA the poor artist is virtually on their
own when it comes to protecting themself from
fraudalent practices - EVEN WITH A CONTRACT!
Unless you're a very well-heeled artist you'll
be severely depleted funding your own lawsuit.
Luckily, in a very few states - California
especially - there are lawyers and legal
consultants who will represent artists for
either nominal fees or no fees, depending on
their liberal associations.
What this all means is that any artist who
has a serious investment in their art works
better do their homework when selecting a
gallery to represent them. That means the gallery
should have an impeccable reputation, been
in business for the requisite length of time
to have required such a reputation, etc. etc.
Tony W.
>
> "Tony W." (ton...@hotmail.com) writes:
> >
> > Doesn't anyone else have anything to add to this, or are you all too
> > busy arguing about politics?
> > I want opinions from more people, please.
> > Help!
>
> Since you asked...
>
> I just want to clarify something. I while back in this thread, do I
> remember you writing that you have your work in more than one gallery in
> the city where you live? If this is so, and all of these galleries know
> that you are doing this, and don't have a problem with it, then I would
> use that as the precedent of what to do.
Thanks, Lauren.
I have my paintings consigned to three local galleries and I sell prints
to about 25 local galleries. Most, if not all of them know that I have
various local galleries in my stable. Some of the gallery owners gripe
that I sell to too many local galleries and to too many local galleries
that are close to the complainants' galleries, but my position is that,
because I'm trying to eke out a living, I'll sell to as many galleries
as I can and if some of them don't like that, they have the right to
stop buying my prints or taking my paintings on consignment.
I'm not sure what your point is. My question was: Is it okay to sell a
painting to one of the customers of one of the galleries that buys my
prints?
I spoke last night again the the customer who's interested in buying
another of my paintings, and this time he said he's not sure if the
gallery owner gave him the idea to look for my Web site, or if it was
the customer's own idea.
However, I'm thinking now that that gallery owner has done such a great
job of promoting my art that I would give him a 10 percent referral fee
if the customer buys the painting that he's coming to my studio to look
at tomorrow.
Tony
Tony W.
Thanks, Newt.
I agree.
But I don't know how I could ascertain whether or not the local
galleries have impeccable reputations. I'm not aware of any blacklists
for local galleries. There wouldn't be any formal blacklists published
by arts organizations, because the organizations could be sued for libel
or defamation of character. I don't know of any artists who are familiar
with many of the local galleries that I deal with.
Tony
Dr. Slick
>
> I'm sure that the gallery owner will feel as if I've bypassed him by
> selling directly to his customer without sharing the profit.
Seems to me that the first gallery owner didn't really have a
problem referring the customer to the second gallery. And they did so
without asking for any commission on the sale of your painting at the
second place, even though they made the referral.
So I don't think they should be too concerned about sales from
the customer contacting you directly. If they really like your work,
they would let you do your personal deals (knowing you are somewhat
starving), and be happy selling prints and commissions from their
gallery.
I guess it would be a little too much to ask you to ask them
yourself.
Slick