Typical prices by size of the paintings
ra...@inf.com
I have followed the discussion regarding pricing of paintings. If any one can
provide information on normal prices of paintings by size of the paintings I
would appreciate it. (New artist Vs famous artist) Sizes:
18" x 24"
24" x 36"
24" x 48"
36" x 48"
Thanks a bunch,
Ram
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
DFRussell
In article <6kk06l$b5k$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, ra...@inf.com writes:
|> I have followed the discussion regarding pricing of paintings. If any one can
|> provide information on normal prices of paintings by size of the paintings I
|> would appreciate it. (New artist Vs famous artist) Sizes:
There is little to no relationship between the size of a
painting and it's cost.
--
Views expressed are personal and not necessarily shared by my employer.
Aunty Spam
By golly, someone fell for it!
Ram: You need to read The Horse's Mouth, by Joyce Cary. Look in any good
used-book store. You'll have to adjust the prices for postwar inflation.
Cheerio,
Aunty S.
ra...@inf.com wrote in message <6kk06l$b5k$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>I have followed the discussion regarding pricing of paintings. If any one
can
>provide information on normal prices of paintings by size of the paintings
I
>would appreciate it. (New artist Vs famous artist) Sizes:
>
Philip Ayers
In article <6kk302$1tbc$1...@rtpnews.raleigh.ibm.com>, d...@nospam.com
(DFRussell) wrote:
: > In article <6kk06l$b5k$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, ra...@inf.com writes:
: > |> I have followed the discussion regarding pricing of paintings. If
any one can
: > |> provide information on normal prices of paintings by size of the
paintings I
: > |> would appreciate it. (New artist Vs famous artist) Sizes:
: >
: > There is little to no relationship between the size of a
: > painting and it's cost.
This RE: is mostly correct, however for a given artist, known or unknown,
size is the most important determining factor of price. Obviously this
does not hold true in the secondary market (auction houses and resell)
where taste rules.
The top poster seems to think that art can be priced -absolutely- based on
size, which is absurd! Once the work is going up in the gallery the dealer
and the artist determine the price based on subjective accessments. If it
is a first show there is a limit to price determined by the location and
pre-exhibit reaction and sells. New York prices are higher than Chicago or
Washington. Once the price is established supply and demand come into
play. Within this context of supply and demand, size is the most important
criteria for determining the price of a given work of art. Exceptions do
exist. For instance, if a peice is more complex and takes longer to
produce then it will usually be more expensive, duh. This non-conformity
to a size reference is more common with sculpture than it is with
painting, for obvious reasons. If you make a small sculpture out of gold
it will cost more than a large one cast in bronze, where as paint
materials are pretty uniform. Actually, J. Pollack's paintings were
cheaper than Motherwell's because house paint is cheaper than "artists"
paint. NOT!
Anyway the phrase "More art cost more money"* is the norm. Need I say more?
* Philip Ayers, 1996
Philip (never Phil) Ayers
http://www.mindspring.com/~p.ayers/
p.a...@mindspring.com.
Larry Seiler
*whew* this is difficult since no universal exists. It is fair to say
that once an artist's work is priced with one size, one has to consider
fluctuations from there. Many galleries in the Midwest require at least
$2,000 for a work to be considered acceptable into their gallery. Since
they often take about 50%...sometimes a rep gets a portion....so for the
artist to make anything and everyone else in the food chain, a price must
be worthwhile and yet appeal to the public.
Some of the galleries I have worked with think of 22"x 28" as the minimum
size they are interested in....
As it turns out I priced my work at that minimum acceptable size at the
$2,000 then for the starting point. I have one work in a similar gallery
that is 24"x 48" and priced about $4500, and then work my way down from the
22"x 28" size for other galleries that will take smaller works. In time I
created some kind of a scale.....but yet nothing that I can absolutly state
"this size, this price....!"
Some work requires more need to acquire resource and study, more energy and
time for completion.
Then there is another issue some have many opinions on. For example, I
find a landscape of that would sell around $500-$700 in Packer/Beer
country, would sell about $1200-1600 in Minneapolis....and possibly up to
about $4,000-$7,000 or more in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. For one, many of the
affluent would have to explain to their social circles forever why they
would have bought and hung a $200 painting to put in their decor. Thus, I
wonder if there does not exist a correlation to new home building and
appraisal values. If homes going up are about $90,000 versus a part of the
country where homes go around $650,000......etc.,
Lastly of course, comes the justification for such. Why should the work be
anything? Some depend upon competition to justify the "who" of what they
are, and rely upon marketing ploys to make that fact known. Some, upon
peer recognition and getting accepted in specific shows as if to suggest
you have "arrived."
If one is doing abstract work.....some peer input helps, shows, etc., but
if many do not understand the direction of your work you may not get fair
indication. If realism, you will find the road a little more coarse
because everyone has eyes and an opinion to your rendering and anatomical
capabilities. If you are trying to be a realist and trying your best, you
will tend to wish to be around those that pander your capabilities. A
safety zone. But, the decent money in realism you will find in the long
haul goes to capable skill developed persons. Nothing seems so sad to me
as one that attempts to overprice their work when their skill development
suggests they yet have much learning to do. So...pricing work. Is one yet
predominantly a student, or is one becoming more recognized as mastering
their field. Try to get work into some reputable galleries in your area,
and get feedback. That may be an indication where your work ought to be
priced, or if it is still just in the process of development.
tok...@iti2.net
In article <6kk06l$b5k$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
ra...@inf.com wrote:
>
>If any one can
> provide information on normal prices of paintings by size of the paintings I
> would appreciate it.
> 18" x 24" $89 for watercolors, $124 for oils and acrylics, add $93 if the
painting features a nude male, unhappy people or big eyed injun children.
>
> 24" x 36" as above plus 12%.
>
> 24" x 48" $59 for water colors, $109 for oils and acrylics, no additions.
>
> 36" x 48" $35 for watercolors, $1200 for oils and acrylics, add $299 if
the painting features a nude male, unhappy people or big eyed injun children.
>
> Thanks a bunch,
> Ram
>
It has been my pleasure helping, Pam