Fine art and capitalism
Dan Fox
a few comments, below:
hug...@interlog.com (mdeli) wrote:
> From my book "No Skill No Art."
>
> Second tier galleries rarely own anything more than a desk and some
> picture hooks. Their only costs are rent and a few utilities. They
> rarely own any artwork as almost everything is on consignment.
> Although they sometimes print brochures for their shows and provide
> the wine and potato chips these are often paid for by the artists.
> Added to this the artist also pays thirty to fifty percent commission
> on all sales.
In fairness, most galleries must pay astronomical rents for space in
desirable areas. They must also pay staff salaries. Some have staff on
commission to get around this. Unless the gallery is really hot, you can
imagine how good those commission-only salespeople are.
Also, any legitimate gallery prints invitations (usually not brochures) at
their expense, and mails them to an extensive list. They also mail to the
artist's list. They send out press releases, write letters and email,
and make phone calls to sell work. No real gallery depends on foot traffic.
>
> t might surprise the reader to know that galleries rarely have trouble
> finding artists to fill their spaces. Art dealers are constantly
> inundated with requests to look at work by artists wishing to show.
> The lucky dealer can then get everything on consignment with no outlay
> of money. But there is a hitch. Although the dealer can find hundreds
> of artists, he rarely finds any who really sell well. The few artists
> who do manage to sell well head for the first tier.
True. However, many artists that sell well stay and make a good living at
galleries that are not in the top 10. You don't have to be at Mary Boone to
have a good career.
In spite of the
> inflation of available artists from which to choose, few second tier
> galleries make enough profit in order to last for any great length of
> time. The result is that most second tier galleries are fly-by-night
> operations. Here today, gone tomorrow.
Some stay, some go. It is almost impossible to tell which is which, because
the gallery financing and income may not be at all apparent. Galleries in
which you see no foot traffic may be making a fortune selling to known
collectors.
>
> Because a large over-population of vain artists flock to galleries
> offering to consign them paintings at essentially no cost to the
> gallery, the art business sometimes amounts to little more than theft.
> I do not maintain that all galleries are shady or dishonest, but most
> artists have had some bad experiences at one time or other.
Yes. My gallery in Kansas City vanished without a trace. Phone
disconnected, home phone disconnected - gone. Fortunately, he only had two
of my paintings. To be fair, this is the only time anything bad has
happened to me in 25 years of exhibiting. It goes with the territory - no
risk, no exhibits.
Of course I have a legal consignment sheet (see comment below). I thought
of framing it as a post-modern piece.
>
> Many artists are often so happy to have their work accepted that they
> fail to get proper receipts. If any works sell, the gallery can, just
> keep the proceeds of the sale. Artists frequently have to sue
> galleries and more than a few gallery owners have been known to
> vanishes with the proceeds.
These are called consignment sheets. Some galleries offer contracts, others
do it on an handshake. Both are fine (have a lawyer read the contract).
However, you MUST have a consignment sheet. This must list: each work, its
price, the dealer commission, and that the work is property of the artist
until sold. A very important point, often missed: the sheet must specify
when payment is to be made to the artist ("payment of the artist's portion
to be made in full within two weeks after the gallery receives payment",
for example)
> Now and again we see newspaper articles about such scandals. I have
> known artists who have had no end of troubles leading to lengthy
> costly lawsuits against dealers. I have also known of dealers who
> spent most of their time avoiding telephone calls from irate artists
> and dodging summons servers.
A favorite shady trick of some galleries is to collect the money from a
sale and use the artist's portion to pay the rent - putting the artist off.
Or selling work and not telling the artist. Very common practices.
There are also a lot of fraudulent exhibitions out there - I don't mean the
ripoffs where they collect entry fees for profit but still have an exhibit
- I mean illegal scams where there is no exhibit at all. Check everything
out first - save yourself a lot of misery.
>
> The root of this trouble often lies with the artists because so many
> of them prefer to live in a kind of ethereal dreamland and steadfastly
> refuse to learn anything about the business aspect of their
> profession. Many are ripe to be fleeced by unscrupulous dealers.
Yep. You MUST learn some basics about selling art. However, you must take
risks to be exhibited - just try to minimize them.
>
> Mani DeLi
> ...no skill no art
>
> Check out my web page, A Skeptical View of Modern Art and
> my book, comments, work at:.
> http://www.interlog.com/~hugod/
--
Dan
'The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom.' - Blake
http://www.danfoxart.com
mdeli
Second tier galleries rarely own anything more than a desk and some
picture hooks. Their only costs are rent and a few utilities. They
rarely own any artwork as almost everything is on consignment.
Although they sometimes print brochures for their shows and provide
the wine and potato chips these are often paid for by the artists.
Added to this the artist also pays thirty to fifty percent commission
on all sales.
t might surprise the reader to know that galleries rarely have trouble
finding artists to fill their spaces. Art dealers are constantly
inundated with requests to look at work by artists wishing to show.
The lucky dealer can then get everything on consignment with no outlay
of money. But there is a hitch. Although the dealer can find hundreds
of artists, he rarely finds any who really sell well. The few artists
who do manage to sell well head for the first tier. In spite of the
inflation of available artists from which to choose, few second tier
galleries make enough profit in order to last for any great length of
time. The result is that most second tier galleries are fly-by-night
operations. Here today, gone tomorrow.
Because a large over-population of vain artists flock to galleries
offering to consign them paintings at essentially no cost to the
gallery, the art business sometimes amounts to little more than theft.
I do not maintain that all galleries are shady or dishonest, but most
artists have had some bad experiences at one time or other.
Many artists are often so happy to have their work accepted that they
fail to get proper receipts. If any works sell, the gallery can, just
keep the proceeds of the sale. Artists frequently have to sue
galleries and more than a few gallery owners have been known to
vanishes with the proceeds.
Now and again we see newspaper articles about such scandals. I have
known artists who have had no end of troubles leading to lengthy
costly lawsuits against dealers. I have also known of dealers who
spent most of their time avoiding telephone calls from irate artists
and dodging summons servers.
The root of this trouble often lies with the artists because so many
of them prefer to live in a kind of ethereal dreamland and steadfastly
refuse to learn anything about the business aspect of their
profession. Many are ripe to be fleeced by unscrupulous dealers.
Mani DeLi
Sharlene
Dan Fox wrote in message <19991020100719.966$X...@newsreader.com>...
>This discussion is pretty accurate and of real value of new artists. I have
>a few comments, below:
>
>hug...@interlog.com (mdeli) wrote:
>> From my book "No Skill No Art."
>
>desirable areas. They must also pay staff salaries. Some have staff on
>commission to get around this. Unless the gallery is really hot, you can
>imagine how good those commission-only salespeople are.
>Some stay, some go. It is almost impossible to tell which is which, because
>the gallery financing and income may not be at all apparent. Galleries in
>which you see no foot traffic may be making a fortune selling to known
>collectors.
>
be really irritated if someone walks in 'off the street' and have a real
stand-offish attitude. I've even seen some so good at this, that I thought
they were part of the exhibit!
>
>Of course I have a legal consignment sheet (see comment below). I thought
>of framing it as a post-modern piece.
>
any and every award, citation, promotional photo, license, etc. on their
walls. If you have framed (easy access) consignment sheet guidelines,
payment schedule, etc. up, it makes it very easy to simply point to the way
you do business and stops alot of the nonsense.>
>
>> Many artists are often so happy to have their work accepted that they
>> fail to get proper receipts. >
This comes, I think, from the problem with having started off at an early
age displaying one's gift for art. Family and friends ooh and aah at
length. Then you start with classes where everyone else's families and
friends oohed and aahed at their work, and the inferiority complex begins.
I always feel that everyone else's work is superior to mine, no matter what
I'm told. Can't help it. There's seems to be something new to learn all
the time and I'm an old-timer! So, if a gallery wants to display my work
for a showing, what-have-you, it's exciting -- and, very difficult to have
happen, especially for new artists. It's like dropping a hook in the middle
of a school of fish caught in a small pool.
<Snipped>
A very important point, often missed: the sheet must specify when payment is
to be made to the artist ("payment of the artist's portion to be made in
full within two weeks after the gallery receives payment", for example)
>
>A favorite shady trick of some galleries is to collect the money from a
>sale and use the artist's portion to pay the rent - putting the artist off.
>Or selling work and not telling the artist. Very common practices.
><Snipped>
>> The root of this trouble often lies with the artists because so many
>> of them prefer to live in a kind of ethereal dreamland and steadfastly
>> refuse to learn anything about the business aspect of their
>> profession. Many are ripe to be fleeced by unscrupulous dealers.
>
>Yep. You MUST learn some basics about selling art. However, you must take
>risks to be exhibited - just try to minimize them.
>
I'm a little sterner on my contracts and my consignment sheet. It reads,
"Please make checks payable to both gallery and artist." This, of course,
only works for those paying by check. For those using credit cards and
cash, it's part of my administrative discipline (and deductible) to phone
each gallery one day a week to check on items still in their possession. I
have a card file for this and sundry other information. At the time of
leaving the exhibit in their possession, I have already explained that my
business procedure is for the protection of both of us and is done in a very
friendly way. I also think attitude is a very important part of the way
you will be treated.
I know it's hard to think administratively when you're an 'artiste'; but, if
you have any intention of making a living from your work, then this is part
and parcel of what you do until you have an agent who will handle all of
this for you. By the time you have an agent, you should have the nuts and
bolts of your business clear enough in your own mind, as well as your
paperwork, then they know you mean business.
Take the time to develop your contracts, consignment sheets, pricing,
what-have-you and get a nice supply on hand. You will be taken more
professionally and find the problems with galleries get much smaller.
They'll save the chicanery for the dewy-eyed artist who's just grateful to
be accepted. Getting these documents done will take a few weeks out of your
life, and then you can get back to the business of painting. As time
passes, the changes will be simple to adjust in your already prepared forms.
Dumb as it may sound, people give more credit to a printed form than a
hand-written note -- and you will always have something in writing to point
to when a problem arises. I also have signatory lines for both parties on
every page of my paperwork, using the old "seen and agreed" leader.
Know what you offer to a client for a given price and put that into your
information sheet; i.e., does painting come with matting, framing, string on
the back, additional pictures of your family.........you get the point. If
you appear professional, you'll be treated professionally. If you're low
on cash (who isn't?), ask a friend to do your paperwork on their computer
for you. You should supply the paper and offer to help on paying for an ink
cartridge, as well. A ream of paper is approx. $2.30 and the cartridge
around $30-$35. A small investment for a career decision, don't you think?
You'll get ripped off now and again, but you've reduced the odds.
John Haber
> I've been in galleries with assistants who seem to
>be really irritated if someone walks in 'off the street' and have a real
>stand-offish attitude.
I sympathize with both sides. I'm in publishing, and I know that
we've a process for evaluating manuscripts -- the editor's eye, the
advice of scholars -- and we don't exactly hire the young assistants
to take charge of accepting off-the-street submissions. They'd
rightly feel uncomfortable with a stranger.
john
mdeli
Here are some of the reasons why brand-name creators of Blue Chip
Modern Art get all that attention while thousands of others who create
much the same thing rarely sell anything?
The brand name modern artist is not really the result of any public
consensus. He is more often then not the creation of art dealers,
critics, and museum curators working together much like stock market
insiders. Raising art market prices often requires little more than
quite agreements among small groups representing these professions who
own and speculate in modern art and profit from it.
Essentially all it takes is few insiders geting together each agreeing
to do his part in order to push a particular artist. The museum
curator agrees to exhibit or purchase while the critic agrees to do
his bit of complimenting and the dealer agrees to show and publicize.
This allows all for all kinds of deals. It can involve pooling money
in order to invest in an artist they plan to push or marketing what
they already own.
Anyone interested has often read newspaper articles about the sale of
some now famous modern work that fetched some millions in auction.
These articles usually mention the price, the artist, and the auction
house very prominently in the headline. They also describe the
sensational bidding by buyers and mention former prices in comparison
with the latest. However they rarely mention auction pooling, shill
bids, auction house extended credit and fake sales.
One of the best price indicators for Modern Art is revealed` at those
highly publicized Bluechip Modern auctions. Before an important
auction those who own works by a particular artist will contact one
another and form a biding pools. These can be large or small. The pool
members will agree to bid up the auction price of a particular work to
a certain high value. The obvious intention here is to raise the
selling price of their inventory. If their bidding is successful each
pays an agreed percentage of the bid price. Should someone other than
the dealer surpass the pool bid price so much the better for the
dealers who have inventory. The higher the final bid price for an
artwork the better for all those who hold that artists work.
I'm sure any intelligent reader can figure out other variations. The
point here is that the exhibition, the praise and the prices for brand
name Blue Chip artwork is to a very high degree controlled by insiders
with the right connections. The actual works of these artists rarely
represent any consensus public taste as the public is only allowed to
hear about and see certain works in those places which are acclaimed
to exhibit great art
mdeli
>This discussion is pretty accurate and of real value of new artists. I have
>a few comments, below:
>
>hug...@interlog.com (mdeli) wrote:
>> From my book "No Skill No Art."
>>
>> Second tier galleries rarely own anything more than a desk and some
>> picture hooks. Their only costs are rent and a few utilities. They
>> rarely own any artwork as almost everything is on consignment.
>> Although they sometimes print brochures for their shows and provide
>> the wine and potato chips these are often paid for by the artists.
>> Added to this the artist also pays thirty to fifty percent commission
>> on all sales.
>
>In fairness, most galleries must pay astronomical rents for space in
>desirable areas. They must also pay staff salaries.
Which shows that art is judged not by quality, but among other things
"desirable Areas." the chapter on economics in my book goes into this
in detail. I divide galleries into three tiers.
> Some have staff on commission to get around this. Unless the gallery is really hot, you can
>imagine how good those commission-only salespeople are.
In most cases I regard the staff and the owner's as a bunch of shills.
On the other hand I don't take this as anything more than humorous
because I regard most of the so called artists as charlatans.
>Also, any legitimate gallery prints invitations (usually not brochures) at
>their expense, and mails them to an extensive list. They also mail to the
>artist's list. They send out press releases, write letters and email,
>and make phone calls to sell work. No real gallery depends on foot traffic.
First tier galleries are little more than a list of paying richies.
The second tier needs street traffic.
>
>>
>> t might surprise the reader to know that galleries rarely have trouble
>> finding artists to fill their spaces. Art dealers are constantly
>> inundated with requests to look at work by artists wishing to show.
>> The lucky dealer can then get everything on consignment with no outlay
>> of money. But there is a hitch. Although the dealer can find hundreds
>> of artists, he rarely finds any who really sell well. The few artists
>> who do manage to sell well head for the first tier.
>
>True. However, many artists that sell well stay and make a good living at
>galleries that are not in the top 10. You don't have to be at Mary Boone to
>have a good career.
Artists who are superior in ther craft are in demand however they
manage.
>
>In spite of the
>> inflation of available artists from which to choose, few second tier
>> galleries make enough profit in order to last for any great length of
>> time. The result is that most second tier galleries are fly-by-night
>> operations. Here today, gone tomorrow.
>
>Some stay, some go. It is almost impossible to tell which is which, because
>the gallery financing and income may not be at all apparent.
Most second tier galleries don't last. The game is to get a list of
richies and float up to the first tier. Few succeed.
>Galleries in
>which you see no foot traffic may be making a fortune selling to known
>collectors.
That defines first tier galleries.
>>
>> Because a large over-population of vain artists flock to galleries
>> offering to consign them paintings at essentially no cost to the
>> gallery, the art business sometimes amounts to little more than theft.
>> I do not maintain that all galleries are shady or dishonest, but most
>> artists have had some bad experiences at one time or other.
>
>Yes. My gallery in Kansas City vanished without a trace. Phone
>disconnected, home phone disconnected - gone. Fortunately, he only had two
>of my paintings. To be fair, this is the only time anything bad has
>happened to me in 25 years of exhibiting. It goes with the territory - no
>risk, no exhibits.
>
>Of course I have a legal consignment sheet (see comment below). I thought
>of framing it as a post-modern piece.
You should.
>> Now and again we see newspaper articles about such scandals. I have
>> known artists who have had no end of troubles leading to lengthy
>> costly lawsuits against dealers. I have also known of dealers who
>> spent most of their time avoiding telephone calls from irate artists
>> and dodging summons servers.
>
>A favorite shady trick of some galleries is to collect the money from a
>sale and use the artist's portion to pay the rent - putting the artist off.
>Or selling work and not telling the artist. Very common practices.
Which in simple English means stealing.
>
>There are also a lot of fraudulent exhibitions out there - I don't mean the
>ripoffs where they collect entry fees for profit but still have an exhibit
>- I mean illegal scams where there is no exhibit at all. Check everything
>out first - save yourself a lot of misery.
>
>
>>
>> The root of this trouble often lies with the artists because so many
>> of them prefer to live in a kind of ethereal dreamland and steadfastly
>> refuse to learn anything about the business aspect of their
>> profession. Many are ripe to be fleeced by unscrupulous dealers.
>
>Yep. You MUST learn some basics about selling art. However, you must take
>risks to be exhibited - just try to minimize them.
>
The only way to minimize them is to know what's going on. Most don't.
That is why I included a chapter on economics in my book.