FINE ARTS DISCUSSION
dgo...@bright.net
I just recently started viewing this discussion group, and thought it
would have more discussion on technics, problems, helps, etc. -- not
mostly "advertising." Is there such a place?
Thanks,
k
gary and/or sandra shelton
In article <350168DA...@bright.net>, "dgo...@bright.net"
<dgo...@bright.net> wrote:
I don't know if there is such a place. I responded to your post because I
was expecting the same thing and found all these ads. I guess it is like
the porno posts....you just have to overlook them to find something
worthwhile. By the way, what kind of discussion are you interested in? I'm
just your run of the mill artist...I went to college but spent most of my
time studying for tests and don't remember much art history. But I like to
read about art and talk about art and breath art if I can.
Good luck on your hunt for a discussion group,
-S
Charles Eicher
> I just recently started viewing this discussion group, and thought it
> would have more discussion on technics, problems, helps, etc. -- not
> mostly "advertising." Is there such a place?
This newsgroup is as good as any for discussions. It does have a lot of
advertising, spam, etc, but I don't even bother with it, I just ignore it,
or put the most persistent, pesky advertisers in my killfile.
Consider this newsgroup like any art magazine.. Skip past the
advertisements, to get to the main articles.
I don't have much trouble working up a good discussion here and there. Its
really up to YOU, to make this newsgroup to be whatever you want it to be.
Please contribute, and you may be pleasantly surprised at the responses.
--
| Charles Eicher |
| -=- |
| cei...@inav.net |
Shaun Gamache
go to http://www.trillium-arts.on.ca/ . Brian is the hoste of the group
and is rally great. Their is one disscussion group on Canadian artist
issues, and the other is about art buisiness. I find the discussions are
very educational. Plus people get flamed if they advertise too much or if
that is all their is. They are both separate newsgroups by email.
dgo...@bright.net wrote:
> I just recently started viewing this discussion group, and thought it
> would have more discussion on technics, problems, helps, etc. -- not
> mostly "advertising." Is there such a place?
>
> Thanks,
> k
dgo...@bright.net
>
> > I just recently started viewing this discussion group, and thought it
> > would have more discussion on technics, problems, helps, etc. -- not
> > mostly "advertising." Is there such a place?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > k
>
> was expecting the same thing and found all these ads. I guess it is like
> the porno posts....you just have to overlook them to find something
> worthwhile. By the way, what kind of discussion are you interested in? I'm
> just your run of the mill artist...I went to college but spent most of my
> time studying for tests and don't remember much art history. But I like to
> read about art and talk about art and breath art if I can.
>
> Good luck on your hunt for a discussion group,
> -S
Thanks for your response. I do paintings in oil, but enjoy most all
forms of art. Being a little shy, I "listen" a lot -- even on the PC.
I look forward to learning from other artists.
k
PS - I don't think it is necessary for an artist to put additional tags
on himself -- like PO-MO. Think being an ARTIST is a great gift.
dgo...@bright.net
Charles Eicher wrote:
>
> In article <350168DA...@bright.net>, "dgo...@bright.net"
> <dgo...@bright.net> wrote:
>
> > I just recently started viewing this discussion group, and thought it
> > would have more discussion on technics, problems, helps, etc. -- not
> > mostly "advertising." Is there such a place?
>
> advertising, spam, etc, but I don't even bother with it, I just ignore it,
> or put the most persistent, pesky advertisers in my killfile.
>
> Consider this newsgroup like any art magazine.. Skip past the
> advertisements, to get to the main articles.
>
> I don't have much trouble working up a good discussion here and there. Its
> really up to YOU, to make this newsgroup to be whatever you want it to be.
> Please contribute, and you may be pleasantly surprised at the responses.
>
> --
> | Charles Eicher |
> | -=- |
> | cei...@inav.net |
Thanks for responding. I work in oils, but am interested in trying
other options. Most watercolors don't have the "depth" I like, but I
have seen some works that show a lot of depth. I would be interested in
learning how to accomplish real depth with watercolors.
k
dgo...@bright.net
I'll check out the website!
Thanks,
k
Shaun Gamache wrote:
>
> go to http://www.trillium-arts.on.ca/ . Brian is the hoste of the group
> and is rally great. Their is one disscussion group on Canadian artist
> issues, and the other is about art buisiness. I find the discussions are
> very educational. Plus people get flamed if they advertise too much or if
> that is all their is. They are both separate newsgroups by email.
>
> dgo...@bright.net wrote:
>
> > I just recently started viewing this discussion group, and thought it
> > would have more discussion on technics, problems, helps, etc. -- not
> > mostly "advertising." Is there such a place?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > k
Petra Rawlence
In article <3502AE4C...@bright.net>, "dgo...@bright.net"
<dgo...@bright.net> writes
>>
>> > I just recently started viewing this discussion group, and thought it
>> > would have more discussion on technics, problems, helps, etc. -- not
>> > mostly "advertising." Is there such a place?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > k
>>
>> was expecting the same thing and found all these ads. I guess it is like
>> -S
>
>Thanks for your response. I do paintings in oil, but enjoy most all
>forms of art. Being a little shy, I "listen" a lot -- even on the PC.
>I look forward to learning from other artists.
>
>k
>
I am so glad that you have overcome your shyness! The tidal wave of
advertising, get-rich schemes and downright nonsense can be quite
intimidating, especially to the newbie - and I am definitely one of
them.
I too am an artist. As a mature student I did a foundation course in
Fine Art, and then went on to a degree course in Public Art & Design.
One important aspect of the course was the need to analyse the public's
perception of and reaction to works of art in public places. If this is
of any interest to you, I'd be happy to discuss it in more detail.
This is (or rather was for the duration of the course) one of my pre-
occupations. I am now working as a fine artist (in 2D and 3D) again,
but begin to feel rather isolated after the lively exchange of ideas at
art school. Therefore:
ALL ARTISTS do come and join this group
(however "shy" or "isolated" you may feel)
for discussion of all aspects of the visual
arts.
--
Petra Rawlence
Paul
Hey K....check out:
dgo...@bright.net wrote:
> I just recently started viewing this discussion group, and thought it
> would have more discussion on technics, problems, helps, etc. -- not
> mostly "advertising." Is there such a place?
>
> Thanks,
> k
ARTspeak
http://www.customforum.com/ARTforum/
Paul
dgo...@bright.net
Thanks for the information. I'll check it out.
k
Charles Eicher
In article <3502B01D...@bright.net>, "dgo...@bright.net"
<dgo...@bright.net> wrote:
> Thanks for responding. I work in oils, but am interested in trying
> other options. Most watercolors don't have the "depth" I like, but I
> have seen some works that show a lot of depth. I would be interested in
> learning how to accomplish real depth with watercolors.
I'm not sure what exactly you mean by depth.. You mean, the illusion of a
deep space, like in a landscape that stretches to the horizon? Or perhaps
you mean deep, strong colors? In either case, I think watercolors don't
have the saturated colors that oil, so you have to achieve effects by
making the colors work against each other (whether the effect you want is a
spatial illusion, or deep rich color effects)..
dgo...@bright.net
I realize that watercolors are more transparent by nature, but I have
seen works that have a lot of "depth" -- like a landscape. Some works
have even looked like photographs. I understand some artists start with
a gesso underpainting. Since I mostly do realistic paintings, I like
the depth and deep rich color effects that I've seen in some artists
accomplish in their watercolor paintings.
What weight paper do you recommend?
Thanks,
k
dgo...@bright.net
Petra Rawlence wrote:
>
> I am so glad that you have overcome your shyness! The tidal wave of
> advertising, get-rich schemes and downright nonsense can be quite
> intimidating, especially to the newbie - and I am definitely one of
> them.
>
> I too am an artist. As a mature student I did a foundation course in
> Fine Art, and then went on to a degree course in Public Art & Design.
> One important aspect of the course was the need to analyse the public's
> perception of and reaction to works of art in public places. If this is
> of any interest to you, I'd be happy to discuss it in more detail.
>
> This is (or rather was for the duration of the course) one of my pre-
> occupations. I am now working as a fine artist (in 2D and 3D) again,
> but begin to feel rather isolated after the lively exchange of ideas at
> art school. Therefore:
>
> ALL ARTISTS do come and join this group
> (however "shy" or "isolated" you may feel)
> for discussion of all aspects of the visual
> arts.
>
> --
> Petra Rawlence
What medium do you work in most of the time? I assume you might be
doing some digital 3D art.
k
Charles Eicher
In article <35075050...@bright.net>, "dgo...@bright.net"
<dgo...@bright.net> wrote:
> I realize that watercolors are more transparent by nature, but I have
> seen works that have a lot of "depth" -- like a landscape. Some works
> have even looked like photographs. I understand some artists start with
> a gesso underpainting. Since I mostly do realistic paintings, I like
> the depth and deep rich color effects that I've seen in some artists
> accomplish in their watercolor paintings.
Well, I'm pretty much the opposite, my works in water media tend to be
abstract and very very flat. I can understand what you're going for,
though. Alas, this is kind of hard to explain with mere words. As I said, I
think watercolorists tend to work more with "simultaneous contrast of
colors".. That's an effect where, for example, a yellow will look different
next to a blue than to a red. Hmm.. this is so hard to explain with words.
> What weight paper do you recommend?
Well, THIS, at least, I can deal with verbally. The biggest problem in
watercolor is buckling and warping of paper, so you should deal with that
first. Some people like to tape wet paper to a board with paper tape, then
let it dry, to stretch the paper taut before painting. This is pretty much
the traditional way to work, but its far too much effort for my tastes.
Plus, I work on very large paper, so its hard to paste up such large
sheets. Anyway, I like to use Strathmore 500, it comes in multi-ply sheets
like 3-ply and 5-ply. It tends to resist buckling quite well even if not
taped down. Also, I often use large sheets of Lenox paper, I don't know the
exact specs but its the largest sheets they sell at about 40x50 inches. Its
a little lighter and buckles more, but its workable. I've used watercolor
paper at weights up to 500lb, the really heavy 500lb sheets are incredibly
stiff, and work exceptionally well, but its far too expensive..
Petra Rawlence
In article <3507512B...@bright.net>, "dgo...@bright.net"
<dgo...@bright.net> writes
>Petra Rawlence wrote:
>>
>>>
>> I too am an artist. As a mature student I did a foundation course in
>> Fine Art, and then went on to a degree course in Public Art & Design.
>> >
>> Petra Rawlence
>
>
>What medium do you work in most of the time? I assume you might be
>doing some digital 3D art.
>
>k
Hello k,
digital 3D art is one of the things I aspire to. I am still too much
of a newbie not only on the Internet, but with computers in general to
have looked past my scanner and Adobe Photoshop. I have used Virtus
Walkthrough, and found it ok for architectural projects. It is too
limited, I think, for any artistic expression.
Can anyone give advice on choice of good 3D software?
Petra
--
Petra Rawlence
CyneTucson
I am a working artist and am seeking an art discussion group dealing with
techniques, etc. I am interested in a discussion of artists of the last
Century and their techniques and inspiration.
Any suggestions?
Thank you. M
Gorden T O'Neill
In themselves artistic, our words mingle, push one against the other, mark
the image of art and artist.
"To act is to live," they say, "to be expressed is to endure." A
DISCUSSION! -- the pusher and the pushed produce that entertainment here.
YOU HAVE remarkable VISIONS.
There's nothing in life that's less real for having been well described.
Gorden T O'Neill
Brother Alphabet
On Sat, 7 Mar 1998, dgo...@bright.net wrote:
> I just recently started viewing this discussion group, and thought it
> would have more discussion on technics, problems, helps, etc. -- not
> mostly "advertising." Is there such a place?
It's not our fault these advertising losers can't seem to figure out that
no one reads their messages...I suppose even bigger losers actually DO
read them...
Technical discussions and the like do in fact occur on this group.
I suggest that you actually include a question or technical problem in
your post instead of complaining about the lack of same.
The biggest annoyances other than the ads in a group heavily frequented
by advertisers are the numerous posts from people complaining about the
ads/lack of content in thr group.
Instead of griping, contribute! Ignore the ads and say something, ask
something, etc.
Hutto
-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-
"I paint what I think, not what I see..." - Pablo Picasso
"You're not the boss of me!..." - J. A. Hutto (Pre age 3)
http://www2.msstate.edu/~jah10 + ja...@ra.msstate.edu
dgo...@bright.net
Gee, thanks! This really makes one want to contribute.
k
Mark Vinsel
In article <ceicher-ya0240800...@enews.newsguy.com>,
cei...@inav.net (Charles Eicher) wrote:
>... The biggest problem in
> watercolor is buckling and warping of paper, so you should deal with that
> first. Some people like to tape wet paper to a board with paper tape, then
> let it dry, to stretch the paper taut before painting. This is pretty much
> the traditional way to work, but its far too much effort for my tastes.
> Plus, I work on very large paper
I paint watercolors and made a contraption to avoid the nuisance of taping
down the paper. It only works for 1/2 sheet of standard paper.It came
about after a very disheartening time when I peeled back the paper tape
when it wasn't wet enough and the tape peeled off part of a painting. At
the time I was in an industrial design class and had a full shop at my
disposal, and an assignment to design something using wood, plastic, and
metal.
I took a piece of plywood about 17" x 24", and fixed two-inch wide
continuous "piano" hinge completely around the border to hold the edges of
the soaked paper. To lock down the paper I brazed 1/4 turn aircraft style
fasteners every three inches to one side of the hinge, but you could use
regular screws with nuts imbedded in the plywood beneath the hinge. A
plastic laminate covers the plywood and bottom part of the hinges for a
clean surface. I made a gasket on the upper hinge from silicone sealant to
grip on the paper, and isolate it from the metal to prevent rust marks. I
used magnetic plastic and another sheet of laminate to make a secure dust
cover. If anyone is interested I could elaborate further off line.
I have also seen some very strong looking clipboards and think something
could be made for this from four of these, which would be much easier.
When I paint outside I use Arches spiral bound sketchbooks and don't even
worry about it buckling. Serendipitous effects can be a nice part of
watercolors.
Mark Vinsel
www.vinsel.com
m...@vinsel.com
(or temp job address- ma...@netopia.com)
a.bucsay
Brother Alphabet is right. Goodness knows that I have my complaints too,
but belly-aching is a cop out. Here is my question for today:
I paint and I represent several artists. We recently donated four works to
public television for auction. We were told that as many as five million
viewers would see the works. Has anyone out there had success with
following up with the bidders who 'lost'?
~~~~~~~~~~
Anita Bucsay
a.bu...@ix.netcom.com
1st Water Fine Art
The Original MICROGALLERY TO GO
http://www.netcom.com/~a.bucsay/1stWaterFineArt.html
~~~~~~~~~~
dgo...@bright.net wrote in message <351088D7...@bright.net>...
Jamil Yamani
hi there this is my virgin message to this discussion group ,did anyone
in the UK see the program Fresh (I think it was called) if so ,what's
the general reaction to the whole art wants to go Pop ,asimilation
theory?? Seriously even though we as artists might be jealous of the
whole 'pop stardom thing' ,can't we devise our own marketing technique
in an effort to reach the masses ?? Show me the light please even if it
is only a 25 watt globe.
Jamil (aka MOTHBOY)
Katherine Allen
Jamil Yamani (ja...@creaschon.demon.co.uk) writes:
>.... Seriously even though we as artists might be jealous of the
> whole 'pop stardom thing' ,can't we devise our own marketing technique
> in an effort to reach the masses ?? Show me the light please even if it
> is only a 25 watt globe.
>
> Jamil (aka MOTHBOY)
------------------
Jamil...I didn't catch "Fresh" in Canada here, but I believe the arts is
long overdue for a revolution...a global anarchy by the "creative
experts" on this planet - artists - if we can just stop creating long
enough to initiate it.
It's the only way artists are going to escape the slavery imposed on us
for eons by greedy galleries, nefarious artists' representatives and
voracious art publishers. We need to communicate these important points:
1. We're mad as hell at paying gargantuan commissions to have our art
displayed, marketed, reproduced and sold, and we're not gonna take it
anymore!
2. We don't really give a porcelain bowl full of waste material what critics
think and say about art, ours in particular...we create it, it says
what we want to say, it's relevant to US and our patrons, and a critic's
subjective opinion is no better than that - just another opinion.
3. The public is not a massive collection of turp-sniffers who need to be
told by self-appointed "experts" what is good art and what is recylable
trash. If art-lovers like it...they must know something the "experts"
have not an ounce of knowledge concerning...like what THEY really
love to look at as opposed to what is just pre-fab hype and PR for
profit art!
4. Galleries and art reps...don't tick us off! We are the artists and
without us your pockets and inventories are empty! Nada!! Neecheevo!!!
5. Don't get your boxers in a knot, galleries but we are all going to study,
read up on, practise and excel in self-promotion, public relations, art
marketing and business and share our successes and failures on this
chatline so ALL artists may break free of the tyranny of galleries and
escape our prison as thralls to the cultural void we have been detained in
for centuries.
6. Move over Celine Dion, Stephen King and Tom Cruise! Our industry is as
capable of creating a "new product" comparable in price, appeal,
accessability and distribution as the Music, Publishing and Film, TV
and Video industries now dominate!!
7. We will never allow any group to "jury" our work again in order to
participate in an art-related event. It's demeaning, humiliating and
perpetuates elitism aimed at keeping us, the artists, in our places.
8. We will no longer give our hard work away to charitable organizations
looking for art to auction for profit, if it does not benefit us
substantially, that is...we receive mandatory optimum free publicity,
a percentage of the bid, and a tax receipt. Nothing less. Ever.
9. We will have a collective tantrum now and insist on being supplicated
to, spoiled rotten and fawned over as the unique, "golden eggs" we all
are, by those who would market and sell our works and deduct their
reasonable commission...after we are paid first!
10. We want our industry back please. It has been mismanaged, bungled and
bled dry for long enough and we, the artists, have decided we can do a
better job for higher revenues...ourselves. Thanking you in advance
for your co-operation.
Art is governed by feudalists...we work our hind ends off and are treated
like cretinous varnish-heads for our efforts. In turn, the public, OUR
public, who like our work, are thought of as ignorant dunces that wouldn't
know a fine piece of art if it was crammed up their nostrils.
We need to take our work and our cultural industry back. We need to learn
to "sell" our work ourselves. We need to communicate to the people that
they may not know much about what the critics call "art," but if they know
what they like then they have a right to see it provided for them. We can
do it. We want to. And we'll put the cash in our own pockets.
No more poverty. No more starving. No more unheated lofts. Just the
dilemma of deciding what to invest our abundance of money on. Gee...it's
always something, isn't it?
:)
--
******************************************************************************
Katherine Allen
dk...@freenet.carleton.ca
www.ncf.carleton.ca/~dk255/index.html
Lauri Levanto
Katherine Allen wrote:
>
> Jamil Yamani (ja...@creaschon.demon.co.uk) writes:
> >.... Seriously even though we as artists might be jealous of the
> > whole 'pop stardom thing' ,can't we devise our own marketing technique
> > in an effort to reach the masses ?? Show me the light please even if it
> > is only a 25 watt globe.
> >
> > Jamil (aka MOTHBOY)
> ------------------
>
> Jamil...I didn't catch "Fresh" in Canada here, but I believe the arts is
> long overdue for a revolution...a global anarchy by the "creative
> experts" on this planet - artists - if we can just stop creating long
> enough to initiate it.
Katherine, the art history of 20th century _is_ a
history of revolution.
Revolution against academic art, so much that to
get academic one must pretend revolutionary.
Jamail asked for mass markets. That is the point.
To sell million copies, 2 dollars each.
Mass market devours videos, CD's and paperbacks.
The Top Tens shall never last more than a month.
Those artist commit themselfs to fashions and whimsies.
Is it your mission Jamail? Have you tried Comic Strips?
As long as we make unique pieces by hand, we are not a mass market
industry. We belong to the service sector, like hair-cutters,
interior decorators and bakers. No revolution can change it.
It does not help if the actresses call themself theaterworkes,
as they did in 60-ies.
Only business-wise talents, like Warhol make the best of both.
Art Factory, with gallery prices :-)
The markets were different before publishing industry.
The courts patronised Royal Opera.
The markets were small, customers lived a days trip apart.
But there was no alternative, no TV. If they wanted something,
they had to pay. And a few of them did.
Katherine was bitter about gallerists that make money by selling.
Theo Van Gogh was a gallerist. He never sold
a piece of Vincent's work. Believe me, he tried.
The self-promoting path Kathereine dreamed of, is not new.
I have a painting of Terttu Jurvakainen, an unknown Finnish
painter. She was forced to support her family by painting.
She painted - and she sold - 2 canvases every day.
No galleries, no publicity. Market prices, market quality.
It is possible.
- lauri
Karen Jacobs
Katherine Allen wrote:
> >
> We need to take our work and our cultural industry back. We need to learn
> to "sell" our work ourselves. We need to communicate to the people that
> they may not know much about what the critics call "art," but if they know
> what they like then they have a right to see it provided for them. We can
> do it. We want to. And we'll put the cash in our own pockets.
>
> No more poverty. No more starving. No more unheated lofts. Just the
> dilemma of deciding what to invest our abundance of money on. Gee...it's
> always something, isn't it?
>
> :)
>
aid on a very big attitude problem, Katherine. You sound very much like someone
who is against the system because you haven't yet figured out how to get on
board. I sincerely hope your sales techniques include a brighter side of your
personality.
I don't want to sell my own work. I'm a lousy salesperson and I'd rather spend
that energy on painting. I don't want to build my own house or bake my own
bread... other's do that so much better than I ever could. So I let them. And I
pay them for their efforts... what's so wrong with that? Of course you are free
to manage your career to the very last detail... this is a wonderful country in
that regard. The system of dispersing art to the public isn't all bad and it
isn't all good... name something that is.
Sorry you've had some bad experiences... we all have... you'd be well advised to
get over it.
--
.....Karen Jacobs.....
http://members.aol.com/kajojacobs/index.htm
Katherine Allen
Karen Jacobs (kjja...@bellsouth.net) writes:
> Katherine Allen wrote:
>> We need to take our work and our cultural industry back. We need to learn
>> to "sell" our work ourselves. We need to communicate to the people that
>> they may not know much about what the critics call "art," but if they know
>> what they like then they have a right to see it provided for them. We can
>> do it. We want to. And we'll put the cash in our own pockets.
>> :)
>>
-------
> Ok... you end your tirade with a little smiley... but I think it's a tiny band
> aid on a very big attitude problem, Katherine. You sound very much like someone
> who is against the system because you haven't yet figured out how to get on
> board. I sincerely hope your sales techniques include a brighter side of your
> personality.
>
On the contrary Karen, I've been a successful artist for two decades and
in that time I've seen many artists become timid approval-seekers under
the spell of the gallery owner and the art critic who control these talented,
creative geniuses like sci-fi cult leaders, as well as dominate the art
market, manipulate the art buyers and isolate the public from
understanding this complex, scary, profound enigma called "art." And why
would they not? They command the awe of the artist, the investment cash
of the buyer and the mystified respect of the masses who, to this day,
still say to me, "I don't know ANYTHING about art.....(you know the rest).
> I don't want to sell my own work. I'm a lousy salesperson and I'd rather spend
> that energy on painting. I don't want to build my own house or bake my own
> bread... other's do that so much better than I ever could. So I let them. And I
> pay them for their efforts... what's so wrong with that? Of course you are free
> to manage your career to the very last detail... this is a wonderful country in
> that regard. The system of dispersing art to the public isn't all bad and it
> isn't all good... name something that is.
Unless home construction or pastries are your livelyhood Karen, these
comparisons aren't relevant. Paying your rent or mortgage is. Collecting
your paycheque is. Controlling your work 100% is. You wouldn't give your
mortgage or lease to just anyone and say, "I loathe paying this every
month and I stink at it anyway, so YOU do it for me. You're so much
better at it than I."
You wouldn't ask someone to redirect your paycheque to their account (and
your significant other does not count) and manage it for you because you're
lousy at budgeting. Why believe someone else could take your work and
treat it and you with deserved respect - the piece because until you
created it it did not exist - and you because you are unique in all the
world and are a creator of something from nothing that touches people and
moves them and compels them to buy.
In my experience artists are perceived as factory workers who don't
produce more than one product at a time and don't deserve to earn a larger
percentage from our toil just because we don't have the capital, resources
or contacts.
I don't ENJOY selling my own work but it's important to me to maintain
control and responsibility for what I am, what I do, how I live.
Marketing my own work is a gruelling, uncreative task at times, but it
sure beats putting weeks of my blood, sweat and tears into a piece and
then giving it to a gallery who might sell it in six months and hand me my
30% cut of the revenues from the sale.
>
> Sorry you've had some bad experiences... we all have... you'd be well advised to
> get over it.
I can't and I won't. Galleries and curators thrive on the thrall
labour of "ostriches," artists who refuse to consider they have the right
and the means to break free...just by learning a little business saavy.
You Karen, as an artist, would do better to think about it.
:)
> --
>
> .....Karen Jacobs.....
> http://members.aol.com/kajojacobs/index.htm
Karen Jacobs
Katherine Allen wrote:
> On the contrary Karen, I've been a successful artist for two decades
I've been a professional artist for three decades, but success has only come in
the last decade. Earlier, I'd created a body of work for which I won many awards
and much acclaim, but could hardly give away... before I got my toe in the doors
of some quality galleries.
> in that time I've seen many artists become timid approval-seekers under
> the spell of the gallery owner and the art critic who control these talented,
> creative geniuses like sci-fi cult leaders,
Sounds like a personality problem. Possibly a matter of poor self esteem.
I can only speak to my experiences with various galleries... maybe two dozen
over the years. Never had a problem with critics except by default... they seem
not to notice me... which probably isn't all bad. I've developed good business
relationships and the only manipulation I've known has been in the form of
conversations about what sells for them and what doesn't... or recently, "be
sure to send something with a lot of contrast and punch for the invitation
piece"... if I'm being manipulated, I love it! They know their market and yes,
I aim to please. It's in my best interest, and I've been able to please myself
as well.
> as well as dominate the art
> market, manipulate the art buyers and isolate the public from
> understanding this complex, scary, profound enigma called "art." And why
> would they not? They command the awe of the artist, the investment cash
> of the buyer and the mystified respect of the masses who, to this day,
> still say to me, "I don't know ANYTHING about art.....(you know the rest).
If I found myself in such an elitist environment... I would leave. The "I don't
know anything about..." comment will always be with us... I say the same thing
about wine. A good gallery is a friendly environment, helpful to those who seek
assistance in their choices. Of course, there are the other kind. and there are
those who seek them, they aren't for everyone. Our business climate provides for
many choices. You shouldn't lump them all together.
> Why believe someone else could take your work and
> treat it and you with deserved respect - the piece because until you
> created it it did not exist - and you because you are unique in all the
> world and are a creator of something from nothing that touches people and
> moves them and compels them to buy.
This is a personal reaction, Katherine, but I really have problem with this
attitude by artists that we are creating something of moral consequence... an
elitist reverence for our "unique creations" that everyone should bow down
before and pay homage to. History will decide if we've contributed anything of
lasting value that can be called "Art" but the present moment requires that we
market out product in the most productive manner... if selling is indeed part of
our plan.
>
> In my experience artists are perceived as factory workers who don't
> produce more than one product at a time and don't deserve to earn a larger
> percentage from our toil just because we don't have the capital, resources
> or contacts.
I don't agree. It's hard work to make any business successful, and running the
business of "artist who makes money" is as tough as any of them. Fortunately, we
choose to slave at a task we love... I've never thought of myself as a factory
worker, even when deadlines loom and there's no time to sleep... that's just
part of the game.
> I don't ENJOY selling my own work but it's important to me to maintain
> control and responsibility for what I am, what I do, how I live.
> Marketing my own work is a gruelling, uncreative task at times, but it
> sure beats putting weeks of my blood, sweat and tears into a piece and
> then giving it to a gallery who might sell it in six months and hand me my
> 30% cut of the revenues from the sale.
30% is tough... I only part with 50% and am getting more at 50% than I ever
dreamed of getting at 100%... and no overhead other than supplies and shipping
one way.
> You Karen, as an artist, would do better to think about it.
Been there, done that... and I'll stick with the galleries.
I wish you well... I know many artists that are doing fine on their own. It's a
hard row to hoe and I appreciate the difficulties. My point in this whole
discussion is that the gallery scene as a whole is not out to gouge the
artist... and such attitudes by other artists reflect on those who chose to be
represented.
You might consider discussing the business aspects of managing your own career
as I'm certain there are many who would benefit from your experience. (And our
respective experiences are all we can really speak to in this regard...)
.....Karen Jacobs.....
http://members.aol.com/kajojacobs/index.htm
Jiri Borsky
Karen Jacobs wrote:
What struck me after reading Karen's post were the similarities between her and mine
approaches to sales, and between our experiences.
As I paint in a different style and operate in a different country (England) this could
be an indication of quite a wide "middle ground" governed, presumably, by common sense.
Below are my quips to Karen's (shortened) text :
> I've been a professional artist for three decades, but success has only come in
> the last decade.
Two decades, "success" in last 8 years, also after I...
got my toe in the doors
> of some quality galleries.
(Success is a relative term, hence my inverted commas.)
> I can only speak to my experiences with various galleries... maybe two dozen
> over the years. Never had a problem with critics except by default... they seem
> not to notice me... which probably isn't all bad.
Pretty much same here.
> History will decide if we've contributed anything of
> lasting value that can be called "Art" but the present moment requires that we
> market out product in the most productive manner... if selling is indeed part of
> our plan.
I go along with this. "Paint now, worry later."
> It's hard work to make any business successful, and running the
> business of "artist who makes money" is as tough as any of them. Fortunately, we
> choose to slave at a task we love... I've never thought of myself as a factory
> worker, even when deadlines loom and there's no time to sleep... that's just
> part of the game.
Pragmatic approach. Here I differ slightly - I would never neglect my sleep! Post-lunch
naps on dusty studio mattress = sheer bliss. ;-)
> I only part with 50% and am getting more at 50% than I ever
> dreamed of getting at 100%... and no overhead other than supplies and shipping
> one way.
Same here, although I view it in a different way: I supply six dealers. I give them my
prices. That is what I want. The pricing is the same for everyone and is mostly based on
size. Dealer's mark-up is their own affair (it is roughly 40 to 50%). Any discount they
give to client must come from their mark-up.
Two of my dealers buy "upfront" from me. They, too get exactly the same prices. Their
only advantage is of getting the "first pick" of the crop when they come to top-up their
stock.
> the gallery scene as a whole is not out to gouge the
> artist...
I agree. Some are slower then others in forwarding the money after sales, c'est la vie.
So far I always got paid, eventually.
Another interesting observation: The local gallery is doing a continuous brisk trade for
me, they are five minutes walk from my house and 10 minutes from my studio. I am the
only Borsky in the telephone directory, easily traced. Yet I get virtually no attempts
of clients trying to cut out the middle-man. They must like choosing from the gallery.
Jiri Borsky
--
remove all zzz from address
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/borsky/
tok...@iti2.net
In article <6kin03$e...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
dk...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Katherine Allen) wrote:
>
>
> Karen Jacobs (kjja...@bellsouth.net) writes:
> >>
> -------
> > Ok... you end your tirade with a little smiley... but I think it's a tiny
band
> > aid on a very big attitude problem, Katherine. You sound very much like
someone
> > who is against the system because you haven't yet figured out how to get
on
> > board.
In article <6kin03$e...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
dk...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Katherine Allen) wrote:
> On the contrary Karen, I've been a successful artist for two decades ...>
>
>
> Why believe someone else could take your work and
> treat it and you with deserved respect -
>
> :)
>
> Katherine Allen
Amen, sister! And nothing succeeds like success!
I've tried to please others with my painting, but everything I did lacked the
vibrancy and fun. It truly showed up lifeless like a $5 prostitute waiting
for her last trick o' the day.
Good luck,
Dan Grabowski
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading