Secrets of success selling limited editions
Tony
few weeks?
An example is an artist in my province who I heard recently sold out a
limited edition of 250 giclées in about five weeks. Apparently, each
print sold for $695, for total retail sales of about $175,000.
Other than having excellent images, tear sheets and magazine
advertising, what are the secrets to building such a high level of
support from collectors?
Barry Stevens
The secret is - there are no secrets.
There's a process that should be able to connect any artist with customers
for the artist's work. Rarely, a print will simply catch the public's fancy,
be in the right place at the right time, connect with people who fancy the
print and who have the money to pay a comfortable price. This can happen,
and it obviously did in the case you mentioned. It is roughly equivalent
with standing in the middle of a field in a thunderstorm holding an
umbrella.... you might be struck by lightening, and you might not.
Some thoughts about "the process", and quick examples, for those with the
interest.
Have a good "story" for the artist and the work. Build a unique mystique for
the artist. The mystique of the artist carries over into the piece. From the
customer surveys I've been doing, the customer is buying both.
Get press releases out to appropriate local and trade media. Write the copy
for an article describing the artist and the work -- small local papers
don't have enough reporters, and they'll be tempted to use the material
as-is in a Sunday feature. Bigger papers will eventually have to assign
something to their Arts Reporter on a slow week, when no natural disaster,
war, or sex scandal dominates the news. If your press releases and images,
together with a biography establishing that mystique, appear consistently in
their in-baskets.
Go to galleries with a finished plan for an exhibit. The gallery owners are
busy, and are usually focused on the dollars-per-square-foot that they can
get from the works hanging on the walls. I've put together several such
exhibits for my wife Nanci's work, complete with media coverage.
Work with non-profit groups - help them with fund-raising - donate a piece
to an "opportunity drawing", proceeds to go to a charity, as part of an
event which itself gets publicity coverage. Let the non-profit people sell
tickets to the opportunity drawing, and hand out brochures about your work
at the same time.
There are more steps in the process, but the list can get bulky. And, I'm
finding that it would be very useful to many artists to have someone else
executing this process for them, and they would like to spend their time
doing their art rather than with the process of selling it.
Does this process work?
My wife's work has picked up steam - oil portraits, acrylics, pastels,
etchings, work on logos, interest in moving an (unfortunately large)
inventory of 8,500 prints of 17 images, big outdoor murals, people coming to
galleries to see (and in some cases, thank God, to buy) her work.. This new
push started with telling her story - State Department "brat", lived all
over the world, parents took a liking to animals, brought 'em home, rehabbed
everything from fishing leopards to a sun bear, to... well, her mother put
her foot down when dad tried to bring home a baby elephant. Saw real
poverty, spent time with "convicts, cannibals, and kings"... Nanci had to
lose the shyness she's had for the 30+ years she's been doing her work. She
had to feel comfortable about putting herself "out there", about telling
people who she was and what her work is. Once she was willing to expose
herself to potential buyers, and spend time with them in social settings in
galleries, people started to buy - not just the work hanging there, but in
many other areas as well.
I'm working with a photographer, who is creating images that to anyone else,
would be an annoying double exposure, or sloppy darkroom work. But, people
who see the images first grab their hearts, then reach for their checkbook.
He gets $150-200 for a framed piece that he can make himself for about
$35-50, depending on framing. He's lived around the world, done things that
people usually read about... built a software company, got tired of it (and
by it), and turned his life in a whole new direction. He gives talks about
his art, and shows the pieces. They sell on the spot. Once he gets his
biography done, and it gets out to a number of media, the same building
process can go on with him.
Then there's the glass artist. I met him by asking his wife (before she was
his wife) out several times. She was working as a waitress. She sat down one
day, put her arm around my shoulder, and said "you gotta come home and meet
my man." I did. we've been friends ever since. I was one of a number of
people who helped them assemble a "compound" on 29 acres of land no one else
wanted. "Well, breakfast is over - lets go out and assemble a building to
house the hot shop." Apprentice programs, education programs in schools...
an interesting note about his childhood... when he was 13, he and his dad
dynamited the top of a hill and created a flat surface they called "Earth
Station One", a landing pad for UFOs. They didn't get permits in advance...
created quite a stir. Again, a story for the artist and his work. His vases
sell for $3,000 - $20,000, his lamps sell for $4,000.
Finally, there's the woman gourd maker in the desert. She assembles
exquisite gourds, creating animal and indian imagery using inlays of silver,
turquoise, mother of pearl, and paint... she's a fugitive from a big
advertising agency.... doesn't want to do the corporate thing. Smaller
gourds (6" in diameter) sell for $350, the larger ones ($10,000- $40,000)
Can YOU do this? Yes. everybody has a "story" - everybody has something
unique about themselves and their life... artists are no exception.
--
Barry Stevens
619-697-1610
"Tony" <to...@design-write.com> wrote in message
news:3B3779F6...@design-write.com...
Tony
> Tony asked, "What are the secrets?"
>
> The secret is - there are no secrets.
>
> There's a process that should be able to connect any artist with customers
> for the artist's work. Rarely, a print will simply catch the public's fancy,
> be in the right place at the right time, connect with people who fancy the
> print and who have the money to pay a comfortable price. This can happen,
> and it obviously did in the case you mentioned. It is roughly equivalent
> with standing in the middle of a field in a thunderstorm holding an
> umbrella.... you might be struck by lightening, and you might not.
But that artist has consistently good sales of her prints and the prints are
all expensive and she has been successful as an artist for many years.
Her prints sell for several times as much as prints of similar quality by other
artists.
> Have a good "story" for the artist and the work. Build a unique mystique for
> the artist. The mystique of the artist carries over into the piece. From the
> customer surveys I've been doing, the customer is buying both.
Do you mean that having an interesting biography creates mystique?
> Get press releases out to appropriate local and trade media. Write the copy
> for an article describing the artist and the work -- small local papers
> don't have enough reporters, and they'll be tempted to use the material
> as-is in a Sunday feature. Bigger papers will eventually have to assign
> something to their Arts Reporter on a slow week, when no natural disaster,
> war, or sex scandal dominates the news. If your press releases and images,
> together with a biography establishing that mystique, appear consistently in
> their in-baskets.
>
> Go to galleries with a finished plan for an exhibit. The gallery owners are
> busy, and are usually focused on the dollars-per-square-foot that they can
> get from the works hanging on the walls.
What about just hanging one's art in the galleries instead of organizing
exhibits?
Thanks for the tips, Barry.
Tony Wypkema
Tony
> Tony asked, "What are the secrets?"
>
> The secret is - there are no secrets.
What about having a name that's easy to spell and pronounce?
My last name is Wypkema, which people have difficulty spelling and pronouncing.
That makes me think that if people want to buy one of my prints that they saw
somewhere, but can't remember how to spell or pronounce my name, they wouldn't
be able to ask for my work at a gallery, which means I must be losing sales.
Tony Wypkema
Barry Stevens
are
> all expensive and she has been successful as an artist for many years.
>
> Her prints sell for several times as much as prints of similar quality by
other
> artists.
Sounds like she had been working a process for some time. Might be
interesting to find out what she's been doing. I've had good luck asking
very accomplished people to be a mentor using flattery... "I understand
you're the world's top expert on _______. I'd sure like to talk with you
about that." One man, 88 years old, laughed his &^% off when I asked, and he
said yes. He told me all about starting the three Fortune-500 companies he
helped to start, with only one condition. That I turn around and help other
people. Successful people usually get to a place where they want to give
back.
Just ask her.
>
> > Have a good "story" for the artist and the work. Build a unique mystique
for
> > the artist. The mystique of the artist carries over into the piece. From
the
> > customer surveys I've been doing, the customer is buying both.
>
> Do you mean that having an interesting biography creates mystique?
An interesting biography helps. So does an interesting viewpoint about art,
and about your art. Feelings. Excitement, Passion. The man I know with the
double exposures (he hates it when I call them that) always uses statements
from - or about - people who buy his work. "She just stood there with tears
in her eyes. When she bought it, she hugged it.", or "It just made me feel
so good!"
Marketing is, in part, about what the product does for the customer.
>
> What about just hanging one's art in the galleries instead of organizing
> exhibits?
That can be frustrating. Most gallery owners are sitting there, waiting for
people to walk in and buy enough art so they can pay their rent. They are
focused on the cash flow of the day, week, and month. Few of them I've met
are willing to do what they call "making an artist". Few of them, indeed,
have the time, wall space, skills, contacts, and money to do so. And this is
in relatively affluent places, like La Jolla, Beverly Hills, New York, or
Sedona. Those galleries who might take on an artist tend to be pretty
demanding in terms of the entire "package" - the package that results from
following the "process".
Something the emerging artist can do (relatively) easily is to organize an
event for the gallery owner. I've done that several times now for Nanci (my
wife), and it's been quite successful. The gallery owner loves it.
Barry Stevens
married to an artist
Here to help.
Barry Stevens
>
> > Tony asked,
>
> My last name is Wypkema, which people have difficulty spelling and
pronouncing.
>
> That makes me think that if people want to buy one of my prints that they
saw
> somewhere, but can't remember how to spell or pronounce my name, they
wouldn't
> be able to ask for my work at a gallery, which means I must be losing
sales.
Nanci's last name is Wright, which is not very hard. But much of her early
work she signed simply "Nanci".Why? I don't know. She was working on another
husband then.
But I do know she changed her name from Nancy to Nanci because there are a
lot less "Nanci's" in the art world.
How about signing your work "Tony" , or "Toni", or "Tony W", or "Tony Wyma"
Bob & Dale Ford
Tony wrote:
May be hard to say but it is recognizable and they that are buying won't get you
mixed up with some one of the same last name.
Dale Ford
Tony
Thanks, Barry and Bob.
I've been mulling over dropping my last name and just using my first and middle
names, so I'd be "Tony Max", which is easy to spell, pronounce and remember,
and Max is an uncommon last name.
It's a difficult decision, though, because, over the past 20 years I've sold
about 1,500 prints and a score of paintings with the name "Tony Wypkema" on
them.
Although I'm not that well known even locally where I sold almost of my art
(because I my work is low-priced and I'm a small cog is a big city of two
million people) the galleries and buyers who do know me know me as "Tony
Wypkema".
If I changed my name, I'd be selling my existing prints with the name "Tony
Wypkema" on them and simultaneously selling prints with my new name "Tony Max"
on them, which would cause confusion.
The galleries would have a hard time deciding which name to file my records
under.
I'm in the Canadian Art Prints catalog, which means I'd have my listing under
two different names.
I'd have to change my logo, letterhead, business card, envelopes, Web site logo
and names, and contact my bank to see if I could get checks made out to two
different names.
Then I'd have to decide how to identify myself when I'm talking with galleries.
I'd have to say, "This is Tony Max, the artist formerly known as Tony Wypkema",
which would become tedious after a while.
The work that I've done up til now to build up my name would be undermined
somewhat, but I think the name change may be beneficial in the long run if I
continue to do a lot of work as an artist.
But if I decided for some reason to revert to my original name, there would be
even more confusion and work involved.
I suppose such a name change could add to the mystique that you were talking
about, which would be a bonus. It may have helped the mystique of "he artist
formerly known as Prince" (although the new name he picked is not easy to
spell, pronounce or remember!) and I'm sure it helped Marilyn Monroe, Elton
John, John Cougar, etcetera.
What do you think?
Tony
> > But that artist has consistently good sales of her prints and the prints
> are
> > all expensive and she has been successful as an artist for many years.
> >
> > Her prints sell for several times as much as prints of similar quality by
> other
> > artists.
>
> Sounds like she had been working a process for some time. Might be
> interesting to find out what she's been doing. I've had good luck asking
> very accomplished people to be a mentor using flattery... "I understand
> you're the world's top expert on _______. I'd sure like to talk with you
> about that." One man, 88 years old, laughed his &^% off when I asked, and he
> said yes. He told me all about starting the three Fortune-500 companies he
> helped to start, with only one condition. That I turn around and help other
> people. Successful people usually get to a place where they want to give
> back.
>
> Just ask her.
I mustered the courage to call her. I talked with her husband, who sells her
art through galleries.
He only said to keep the quality of the work consistent and know who you're
dealing with at the galleries, so his advice wasn't much help.
> > > Have a good "story" for the artist and the work. Build a unique mystique
> for
> > > the artist. The mystique of the artist carries over into the piece. From
> the
> > > customer surveys I've been doing, the customer is buying both.
> >
> > Do you mean that having an interesting biography creates mystique?
>
> An interesting biography helps. So does an interesting viewpoint about art,
> and about your art. Feelings. Excitement, Passion. The man I know with the
> double exposures (he hates it when I call them that) always uses statements
> from - or about - people who buy his work. "She just stood there with tears
> in her eyes. When she bought it, she hugged it.", or "It just made me feel
> so good!"
>
> Marketing is, in part, about what the product does for the customer.
>
> >
> > What about just hanging one's art in the galleries instead of organizing
> > exhibits?
>
> That can be frustrating. Most gallery owners are sitting there, waiting for
> people to walk in and buy enough art so they can pay their rent. They are
> focused on the cash flow of the day, week, and month. Few of them I've met
> are willing to do what they call "making an artist". Few of them, indeed,
> have the time, wall space, skills, contacts, and money to do so. And this is
> in relatively affluent places, like La Jolla, Beverly Hills, New York, or
> Sedona. Those galleries who might take on an artist tend to be pretty
> demanding in terms of the entire "package" - the package that results from
> following the "process".
By the "package", do you mean that the artist is required to produce a minimum
number of new works for the gallery each month?
> Something the emerging artist can do (relatively) easily is to organize an
> event for the gallery owner. I've done that several times now for Nanci (my
> wife), and it's been quite successful. The gallery owner loves it.
I organized an opening for a one-man show I had at a gallery several years ago.
I paid about $2,000 for the advertising, framing, etcetera, so the profits I
would have made were eaten up by those expenses
RBrac53660
>art through galleries.
>
>He only said to keep the quality of the work consistent and know who you're
>dealing with at the galleries, so his advice wasn't much help.
>
He did tell you something. She doesn't sell her own art. Selling the "art" is
a full time job in its self. It is a constant battle of making phone calls
following up keeping tract of all that and more.
Tony
Thanks, RBrac53660. Thanks a good point that I didn't think of.
Tony
Thanks, Barry.
"Tony", "Toni" and "Tony W." are not good choices for names because they're not
unique enough for people to be able to find my Web site when they search for my
name on the Web.
Barry Stevens
> I mustered the courage to call her. I talked with her husband, who sells
her
> art through galleries.
> He only said to keep the quality of the work consistent and know who
you're
> dealing with at the galleries, so his advice wasn't much help.
Not everybody is enlightened. Some people see Life as a zero-sum game: if
one helps someone else "win", the helper "loses".
I subscribe to the "Bigger Pie" theory - when someone new wants a piece of
pie, find a way to make the whole pie bigger, so in the end, everyone gets
more.
Try again - find someone else to talk with. And congratulations for having
the courage to make the call!
>
> > > > Have a good "story" for the artist and the work. Build a unique
mystique
> > for
> > > > the artist.<SNIP>
Those galleries who might take on an artist tend to be pretty
> > demanding in terms of the entire "package" - the package that results
from
> > following the "process".
>
> By the "package", do you mean that the artist is required to produce a
minimum
> number of new works for the gallery each month?
I didn't say that clearly. By "package", I meant this:
**A biography, with some of the mystique items
** Some press releases, again, with the
mystique/human interest angle
** A series of stories about specific pieces, and
the "magic" that the customers feel;
** A portfolio of prints, photos, whatever, including a
description of your services for commissioned works;
** A series of "sales scripts" that a gallery owner or salesperson
can use to describe the work to a prospect: "She starts with
a dark color, broad strokes, and note here where she gets
brighter, with finer stroles" (You can tell I'm not an artist)
** a "sales script" that talks about you, the artist, taken from your
bio, stories, mystique, again for use by the owner/salesperson.
** actual samples for presentation. If samples are impossible, then really
good photos or prints, 8 1/2 x 11, inside heavy-duty page protectors,
hefty three-ring binder.
A good/competent gallery owner will then see how to stand in front of one of
your works and catch the attention - and the imagination - of a prospective
customer. THAT gets them interested, because they start to see how they can
sell your piece.
>
> > Something the emerging artist can do (relatively) easily is to organize
an
> > event for the gallery owner. I've done that several times now for Nanci
(my
> > wife), and it's been quite successful. The gallery owner loves it.
>
> I organized an opening for a one-man show I had at a gallery several years
ago.
> I paid about $2,000 for the advertising, framing, etcetera, so the profits
I
> would have made were eaten up by those expenses
Sounds like the initial negotiations could have been different. With the
last two that Nanci did, our costs were all voluntary - we bought color
copies at Kinko's, and some minor odds and ends, less than $200. Her frames
are simple, and cost less than $30. If the gallery owner wants fancy stuff,
s/he pays for it. The price remains the same to the artist. We sent out
press releases, (free), and the media showed up. (Free publicity for the
gallery). We provided the entertainment - again free. And, we tied 20% of
the proceeds to a non-profit animal rehabilitation group, and the group
brought a golden eagle, a red-tailed hawk, and some of the cutest owls you'd
ever see. (Free) The gallery printed and mailed a couple of thousand
invitations, bought the food and wine, and moved all or some of the other
artists' work out for the opening. Over a hundred people showed up... some
work was sold there, but much more was sold later, through direct calls from
clients.
Now we're experimenting with ways to include the gallery in the sales from
contacts made at the gallery events. Tricky, but everybody has to win for
this game to work right. And working right means that the gallery owner is
selling your stuff and getting you commissions, even while you're not
showing much there. (That's where the "package" comes in.)
A quick funny story about the golden eagle. That's one magnificent bird that
sits shoulder high on its perch. An "artzy-fartzy" lady brought her
little-teeny-tiny-white-doggie into the gallery on a leash. The golden eagle
immediately went into LUNCH!!! mode, and assumed a stalking position. We got
that little white h'ors deurve out of there as fast as we could! Can't kill
the pompous patron's pampered pets.
Barry Stevens
up the mechanism for her, and she keeps it all in tow. If there's something
I need to help with, like sending out an email newsletter, or a broadcast
fax, I get it done. She's an artist at heart, and her tolerance of the
computer is limited. :-)
There is something else, and I'm not quite sure how to write about it. Oh
well - here goes.
This comment was triggered by RBrac's remark on ".... It is a constant
battle of making phone calls following up keeping tract of all that and
more."
Both Nanci and I have been doing quite a bit of inner work. We view all this
work as fun, and joy-filled. Each time she calls someone, we end up making
at least an acquaintance, at best a real friend. We've already had
invitations to come to Australia and to Norway and stay with folks there.
As a result, what was in the past a hateful task, producing anger and
frustration, has been stripped of its negative emotional content. Now, the
artist in Nanci is free to create, and the task-doer in Nanci can do what's
needed to move things out the door. Oh, she'd like nothing better than to
sit in a comfortable, well-lit space filled with music and create. But the
need for the other no longer is a problem. The negative emotion no longer
blocks creativity.
Whether anyone else cares to do that, can't say. Works for her.
Barry Stevens
Married to an Artist
Here To Help
"RBrac53660" <rbrac...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010627175647...@ng-cm1.aol.com...
Barry Stevens
>
> > > Barry Stevens wrote:
> > >
> > > > Tony asked,
> > > What about having a name that's easy to spell and pronounce?
>
>
Tony Max could be great.
The marketing guy in me is thinking...
"Art to the MAX!"
"Maximum Max!"
and soon.
> I've been mulling over dropping my last name and just using my first and
middle
> names, so I'd be "Tony Max", which is easy to spell, pronounce and
remember,
> and Max is an uncommon last name.
>
> It's a difficult decision, though, because, over the past 20 years I've
sold
> about 1,500 prints and a score of paintings with the name "Tony Wypkema"
on
> them.
>
> Although I'm not that well known even locally where I sold almost of my
art
> (because I my work is low-priced and I'm a small cog is a big city of two
> million people) the galleries and buyers who do know me know me as "Tony
> Wypkema".
>
Test market the name... see how people respond.
The change is the opportunity for a press release and a great story.
> The galleries would have a hard time deciding which name to file my
records
> under.
Only at first. Nanci's been using "Nanci", "Nanci Wright", and now "Nanci
Stevens".
her stuff is filed under "Nanci".
>
> I'm in the Canadian Art Prints catalog, which means I'd have my listing
under
> two different names.
Will they let you have a cross-reference listing?
>
> I'd have to change my logo, letterhead, business card, envelopes, Web site
logo
> and names, and contact my bank to see if I could get checks made out to
two
> different names.
All of Nanci's work, regardless of which name it's sold under, is paid for
by checks made out to her company name. One account.
>
> Then I'd have to decide how to identify myself when I'm talking with
galleries.
> I'd have to say, "This is Tony Max, the artist formerly known as Tony
Wypkema",
> which would become tedious after a while.
Here's an idea for a sales aid... a drawing in multiple cartoon-like frames:
First, a frame containing your old name
(Pretend this is a drawing)
TONY WYPKEMA
Then another frame with a big X drawn through the letters WYPKE
Then another frame showing the big X moving towards the end of the MA
A final frame with your new name - TONY MAX
and, of course, your phone number, email address, website URL, etc.
> The work that I've done up til now to build up my name would be undermined
> somewhat, but I think the name change may be beneficial in the long run if
I
> continue to do a lot of work as an artist.
"Boy, this Tony Max stuff is great. Did you know that artist did some REALLY
groundbreaking earlier stuff under a different name? Look it up - Tony
Wypkema."
>
> But if I decided for some reason to revert to my original name, there
would be
> even more confusion and work involved.
>
If you entertain doubts about your work, so will the gallery owners and
customers, who pick up that sort of thing in a heartbeat.
Carve out your mountain... get some climbing boots, and go for it.
And don't look back, or you'll turn into a puddle of indecision.
> I suppose such a name change could add to the mystique that you were
talking
> about, which would be a bonus.
> What do you think?
Exactly.
Barry Stevens
Married to an Artist
Here to help.
Barry Stevens
Tony
> >
> > > > Barry Stevens wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Tony asked,
> > > > What about having a name that's easy to spell and pronounce?
> >
> > Thanks, Barry and Bob.
> >
> Tony Max could be great.
>
> The marketing guy in me is thinking...
> "Art to the MAX!"
> "Maximum Max!"
> and soon.
The ad man is me (since I am a freelance writer as well as an artist) has
thought of the slogan, "MAXimize your walls", and I'm thinking of signing my
paintings as, "Tony MAX" (with capitalized letters for "MAX" and designing a
logo for "Tony MAX" with "MAX" capitalized as well.
> > I've been mulling over dropping my last name and just using my first and
> middle
> > names, so I'd be "Tony Max", which is easy to spell, pronounce and
> remember,
> > and Max is an uncommon last name.
> >
> > It's a difficult decision, though, because, over the past 20 years I've
> sold
> > about 1,500 prints and a score of paintings with the name "Tony Wypkema"
> on
> > them.
> >
> > Although I'm not that well known even locally where I sold almost of my
> art
> > (because I my work is low-priced and I'm a small cog is a big city of two
> > million people) the galleries and buyers who do know me know me as "Tony
> > Wypkema".
> >
>
> Test market the name... see how people respond.
I have tested the idea with a few galleries. They mostly thought it was
unnecessary. But it occurred to me recently that that could be because they've
known me for a long time and have overcome the struggle of having to learn to
promounce and spell "Wypkema", so I should probably try it on new customers.
Also, many of my existing gallery customers are probably not experts at naming,
which is a specialty of public relations, and may not be thinking of the name
change in terms of how the names would be perceived by a potential customer
who's never heard of my names before.
> The change is the opportunity for a press release and a great story.
Good idea.
> > The galleries would have a hard time deciding which name to file my
> records
> > under.
>
> Only at first. Nanci's been using "Nanci", "Nanci Wright", and now "Nanci
> Stevens".
> her stuff is filed under "Nanci".
>
> >
> > I'm in the Canadian Art Prints catalog, which means I'd have my listing
> under
> > two different names.
>
> Will they let you have a cross-reference listing?
I'd have to check with them to find out.
> > I'd have to change my logo, letterhead, business card, envelopes, Web site
> logo
> > and names, and contact my bank to see if I could get checks made out to
> two
> > different names.
>
> All of Nanci's work, regardless of which name it's sold under, is paid for
> by checks made out to her company name. One account.
>
> > Then I'd have to decide how to identify myself when I'm talking with
> galleries.
> > I'd have to say, "This is Tony Max, the artist formerly known as Tony
> Wypkema",
> > which would become tedious after a while.
>
> Here's an idea for a sales aid... a drawing in multiple cartoon-like frames:
> First, a frame containing your old name
> (Pretend this is a drawing)
> TONY WYPKEMA
> Then another frame with a big X drawn through the letters WYPKE
>
> Then another frame showing the big X moving towards the end of the MA
>
> A final frame with your new name - TONY MAX
> and, of course, your phone number, email address, website URL, etc.
That's a creative idea. I didn't even see the commonanlity of the spelling.
> > The work that I've done up til now to build up my name would be undermined
> > somewhat, but I think the name change may be beneficial in the long run if
> I
> > continue to do a lot of work as an artist.
>
> "Boy, this Tony Max stuff is great. Did you know that artist did some REALLY
> groundbreaking earlier stuff under a different name? Look it up - Tony
> Wypkema."
>
> >
> > But if I decided for some reason to revert to my original name, there
> would be
> > even more confusion and work involved.
> >
> If you entertain doubts about your work, so will the gallery owners and
> customers, who pick up that sort of thing in a heartbeat.
True.
> Carve out your mountain... get some climbing boots, and go for it.
> And don't look back, or you'll turn into a puddle of indecision.
>
> > I suppose such a name change could add to the mystique that you were
> talking
> > about, which would be a bonus.
> > What do you think?
>
> Exactly.
Thanks a lot, Barry, for all your advice.
Tony
> There is something else, and I'm not quite sure how to write about it. Oh
> well - here goes.
>
> This comment was triggered by RBrac's remark on ".... It is a constant
> battle of making phone calls following up keeping tract of all that and
> more."
>
> Both Nanci and I have been doing quite a bit of inner work. We view all this
> work as fun, and joy-filled. Each time she calls someone, we end up making
> at least an acquaintance, at best a real friend. We've already had
> invitations to come to Australia and to Norway and stay with folks there.
>
> As a result, what was in the past a hateful task, producing anger and
> frustration, has been stripped of its negative emotional content.
> Now, the
> artist in Nanci is free to create, and the task-doer in Nanci can do what's
> needed to move things out the door.
Interesting that you've adopted personal growth strategies.
So instead of just calling galleries and asking if they want to see Nanci's
art, you get into a conversation with them (if they have the time and are in
the mood?)
That would help to overcome the discouragement of hearing a lot of "No"s.
Selling in general has a repuation for being discouraging because of all the
rejection that the salesperson encounters.
Tony
Barry Stevens
Tony
> >
> > > > Barry Stevens wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Tony asked,
> > > > What about having a name that's easy to spell and pronounce?>
> Tony Max could be great.
Some people have been saying, though, that that name is too similar to "Peter
Max".
Somebody suggested "Tony West", which I like, but I don't think it has the same
impact as "Tony Max", so I'm still more inclined to go with "Tony Max".
RBrac53660
To me this is sad because you'll could be talking about widgets, perfume, Big
Macs or whatever. And the artist in me would like to see "art" on a different
level then commodifacation pre packaged and ready for someones living room
wall. In this sense I think the person purchasing the "art" becomes the
"artist." And the visual representationalist is a mere technition.
2 cents worth
Barry Stevens
> >Interesting that you've adopted personal growth strategies.
> >
> >So instead of just calling galleries and asking if they want to see
Nanci's
> >art, you get into a conversation with them (if they have the time and are
in
> >the mood?)
> >
> >That would help to overcome the discouragement of hearing a lot of "No"s.
> >
> >Selling in general has a repuation for being discouraging because of all
the
> >rejection that the salesperson encounters.
> >
> >Tony
> >
Yes, we form relationships with the gallery owners. Then, try to set up a
situation, like an exhibit, in which everybody wins - artist, owner, exhibit
visitors, customers...
Yes, this stuff is right out of personal growth materials. I even wrote a
book in that genre.
Yes, hearing "No" is tiring, and demoralizing. My first job out of college
was in IBM Sales. The sales class was in Poughkeepsie, NY. They taught us to
deal with "No" in a creative (and by today's standards chauvinistic) way.
They sent us out into the bars at night, with a mission of getting someone
of the opposite sex to say "Yes". What they DIDN'T tell us was that there
were several thousand secretaries and staff assistants in the bar that night
whose sole purpose was to say "No" as creatively as they could. After the
first few minutes, we learned about "No".
>
> To me this is sad because you'll could be talking about widgets, perfume,
Big
> Macs or whatever. And the artist in me would like to see "art" on a
different
> level then commodifacation pre packaged and ready for someones living room
> wall. In this sense I think the person purchasing the "art" becomes the
> "artist." And the visual representationalist is a mere technition.
The art still stands alone. It is the unique work of its creator. And
without that uniqueness, there would be no art.
The process of marketing, however, is just that - a process. I've been in
300 businesses since 1976, in all different industries, non-profit,
for-profit, manufacturing retail, government agencies, makes no difference
whatever. One of the activities needed to make an organization thrive is
marketing. Even if that organization is a sole artist.
The challenge to business is to live up to its alleged capabilities. For
every unique product, there is at least one customer. If our business system
is as good as businesspeople say it is, then it should be possible to find
that unique customer for a unique piece. Or groups of customers, if one is
selling prints in a limited edition. Then, it's only a matter of pricing.
I suggest reversing the equation.
>
> 2 cents worth
Much more than 2 cents.
>
>
> www.geocities.com/winston53660/wbphotog.html
>
Barry Stevens
problem you could turn into an advantage with snippets in press releases,
like this (poorly-written) example:
------------------------
The rising new artist Tony Max, when contacted at his home recently, said he
was flattered to be linked to Peter Max. "He is so great, and I feel
flattered to be mentioned in the same breath. There is no connection,
however."
------------------------
Now when the press release finds its way through PR Newswire, or Business
Newswire, and it gets on the internet, your press release will come up when
people search for you OR for Peter Max.
--
Barry Stevens
"Tony" <to...@design-write.com> wrote in message
news:3B3E1537...@design-write.com...
RBrac53660
>300 businesses since 1976, in all different industries, non-profit,
>for-profit, manufacturing retail, government agencies, makes no difference
>whatever. One of the activities needed to make an organization thrive is
>marketing. Even if that organization is a sole artist.
Great resume!
The next thing I KNOW is that your going tell humans how to make art so that
more people in the market "like it and buy it"
Changing names for the sole sake of selling to a market is ludicrous
I like sake
Tony
> The possibility of name confusion should be short-lived, and could be a
> problem you could turn into an advantage with snippets in press releases,
> like this (poorly-written) example:
>
> ------------------------
> The rising new artist Tony Max, when contacted at his home recently, said he
> was flattered to be linked to Peter Max. "He is so great, and I feel
> flattered to be mentioned in the same breath. There is no connection,
> however."
> ------------------------
>
> Now when the press release finds its way through PR Newswire, or Business
> Newswire, and it gets on the internet, your press release will come up when
> people search for you OR for Peter Max.
>
> --
> Barry Stevens
Thanks, Barry.
I'd be likely to just say there's no connection; I wouldn't be flattered by
being associated with Peter Max because I'm not impressed with most of his art.
I don't think the problem of the name confusion would be short-lived, because I
would continue to meet people who know of Peter Max but don't know of me.
The situation would be similar to people who share the same last name of famous
people. For example, I'm sure that non-famous people with the last name Clinton
are linked to Bill Clinton on an on-going basis.
However, I hope that the linking of Peter Max to me is an issue that would not
come up frequently.
Tony Max
> > >Interesting that you've adopted personal growth strategies.
> > >
> > >So instead of just calling galleries and asking if they want to see
> Nanci's
> > >art, you get into a conversation with them (if they have the time and are
> in
> > >the mood?)
> > >
> > >That would help to overcome the discouragement of hearing a lot of "No"s.
> > >
> > >Selling in general has a repuation for being discouraging because of all
> the
> > >rejection that the salesperson encounters.
> > >
> > >Tony
> > >
>
> Yes, we form relationships with the gallery owners. Then, try to set up a
> situation, like an exhibit, in which everybody wins - artist, owner, exhibit
> visitors, customers...
>
> Yes, this stuff is right out of personal growth materials. I even wrote a
> book in that genre.
Was the book published?
Barry Stevens
> Great resume!
Thanks.
>
> The next thing I KNOW is that your going tell humans how to make art so
that
> more people in the market "like it and buy it"
If you read some my my earlier posts, you probably saw something like this:
* Artists should be free to create as they choose;
* Marketing should be able to find customers for those creations.
And, by the way, one of the worst things that could happen is for me to
start telling people how to make art. I'm a Virgo engineer, who places a lot
of faith in CAD/CAM packages.
> Changing names for the sole sake of selling to a market is ludicrous
The reason for such a change isn't only for selling to a specific market. I
can't speak to the rest of the world, but the North American consumer has
been pretty well described by people who study buying habits - 4th-5th grade
reading level, on the average, with a very low attention span. An average
consumer will spend only 10-15 seconds trying to understand what s/he is
seeing in an advertisement, or on an internet page, and then moves on. I
didn't quite believe it until I put up a couple of websites myself, and then
watched the measurement statistics.
A name change can make it simple to create a "brand"... and the branding
makes it easier for the public to recognize whatever's branded. "Tony Max"
would be an easy name to brand, hence making name recognition easier.
>
> I like sake
So do I. Long night, warm fire, hot woman, a little sake...
Barry Stevens
> I'd be likely to just say there's no connection; I wouldn't be flattered
by
> being associated with Peter Max because I'm not impressed with most of his
art.
> I don't think the problem of the name confusion would be short-lived,
because I
> would continue to meet people who know of Peter Max but don't know of me.
Unless of course, more and more people came to know about you. One day Peter
Max could get a call from someone who asks, "Are you related to Tony Max?"
> The situation would be similar to people who share the same last name of
famous
> people. For example, I'm sure that non-famous people with the last name
Clinton
> are linked to Bill Clinton on an on-going basis.
There's no easy cure for injustice.
> However, I hope that the linking of Peter Max to me is an issue that would
not
> come up frequently.
You're right. It would be most useful to have people focus on you and your
art.
Barry
Sharon Barcone
Barry Stevens wrote in message ...
>
>So do I. Long night, warm fire, hot woman, a little sake...
>
Ohhh.........
sharon
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Dale Ford
Peter Max wrote:
> Hey, you -
>
> Whatis screwin with my name? I read a thirdgrage levil and have an
> attenshun span of 10.345 seconds and I am famus. you are not.
>
> how you like it if I change my name to Peter Wypema huh?
>
> i'll send you 11 million dollar from my petty cash account to go away.
>
> --
> Peter Max
> Don King, exclusive US rep.
> See my new Disney series: Walt is Dead I Am Not.
Marilyn
Peter Max wrote:
I'm sorry to correct you but Walt never died, he got froze.
Barry Stevens
> > Yes, this stuff is right out of personal growth materials. I even wrote
a
> > book in that genre.
>
> Was the book published?
Yes - "The Life Planning Workbook". First uses, with several thousand people
(roughly) in workshop and one-on-one coaching. Now, it's being repackaged,
to create a package for teens, one for adults. Once repackaging is done, and
a better title is chosen, we'll go for the mainstream. Publisher already
chosen, and time is all that's needed.
B
Barry Stevens
Cool it - my wife reads these posts sometimes... :-)
Barry Stevens
-- "TV Disney?"
Sharon Barcone
I envy your wife, she gets my compliments!
s (incognito)
Tony Max
Congratulations, Barry!
Tony
Tony Max
> Hey, you -
>
> Whatis screwin with my name?
I think I got the idea for the name "Max" from the Grumbacher paint I
use. Or it could have been Kodak Max film, or various other commercial
uses of the name. Or maybe it was Peter Max. I can't remember now,
because I've had the idea for at least two or three years.
> I read a thirdgrage levil and have an
> attenshun span of 10.345 seconds and I am famus. you are not.
>
> how you like it if I change my name to Peter Wypema huh?
Whoever you are, you just proved my point by misspelling "Wypkema".
Tony Max
Tony Max
> Tony wrote:
>
> > I'd be likely to just say there's no connection; I wouldn't be flattered
> by
> > being associated with Peter Max because I'm not impressed with most of his
> art.
> > I don't think the problem of the name confusion would be short-lived,
> because I
> > would continue to meet people who know of Peter Max but don't know of me.
>
> Unless of course, more and more people came to know about you. One day Peter
> Max could get a call from someone who asks, "Are you related to Tony Max?"
I've got a lot of work to before that happens, Barry!
Tony
Tony Max
> Changing names for the sole sake of selling to a market is ludicrous.
It's not ludicrous. It's a smart business practice.
For artists, their personal names are essentially their business names, so it
makes sense to use a name that's short, simple, and easy to remember, spell and
pronounce.
Large companies spend a lot of time and money to to come up with names of their
companies and products, and the same business principles apply to artists -- if
the artists are professionals or striving to be professionals.
RBrac53660
>
>For artists, their personal names are essentially their business names, so it
>makes sense to use a name that's short, simple, and easy to remember, spell
>and
>pronounce.
>
>Large companies spend a lot of time and money to to come up with names of
>their
>companies and products, and the same business principles apply to artists --
>if
>the artists are professionals or striving to be professionals.
>
>
It cheapens your image in my opinion to the level of coca cola or some over
priced and over hyped diet drug. I prefer your real name since all Max makes
me think of is large industries zealously force feeding third rate products
and images that are over rated and often times dangerous. If you go this route
I would suggest you switch your name to a Dollar sign since that is the
underlying objective to your name change and it does have a aesthetic idea
behind it.
Barry Stevens
> >
>
over
> priced and over hyped diet drug. I prefer your real name since all Max
makes
> me think of is large industries zealously force feeding third rate
products
> and images that are over rated and often times dangerous. If you go this
route
> I would suggest you switch your name to a Dollar sign since that is the
> underlying objective to your name change and it does have a aesthetic idea
> behind it.
>
>
One of the goals of the many artists I've known was to have their work find
its way into the public eye. If that translated into money, so much the
better, since food, rent, utilities, and luxuries such as medical care are
also an underlying part of the deal that makes art work available to the
world.
Yes, there are bad companies, and harmful products. Any system which allows
freedom of choice and freedom of action will have people who misuse it.
The overwhelming majority of people and businesses, however, are actually
pretty decent.
But, speaking of misuse, it is possible to erroneously characterize
anything, including the system we live under, by implying that it's all bad
because bad companies and harmful products exist. And, that any attempt to
use the system to accomplish a goal, such as selling art, is therefore also
bad.
When a single individual has an opinion, that voice is part of the fabric
that makes up the entire system, and is therefore to be respected. However,
it is only one voice. When getting something out to the public, millions of
opinions must be considered - it's called marketing.
We could elect to change the system... that's been tried, with dismal
results. The most powerful economic engine ever seen on the planet has been
the free-enterprise, market-driven model.
Does it allow mediocrity? Yes.
Does it allow people to get rich? Yes.
Does it create people who are resentful? Yes.
But it also creates the motiviation and incentive for greatness, for
creativity, for high achievement.
Or, as a group of people interested in art, we could learn to use the system
to meet our own objectives - to sell the art that artists choose to create.
The methods and techniques of marketing are well-known, including the issue
of naming an artist and creating a brand identification in the mind of
potential customers. The tools are on the workbench, waiting to be used,
just as the artist's tools are at the easel, waiting to be used.
We could rail about the unfairness of it all, or we could use what's at our
disposal.
Barry
RBrac53660
have noproblem with people earning a living of there art my self for example.
However I will not transform my self into some thing that I am not. Once the
artist bends to market forces they become derrivtive even if it is there own
art unless that very market is there "art work" For christ sake how many
fricken picasso coffe cups do we need in our cabinets.
There was couple of artist in NYC that did a marketing survey of what kind of
painting people wanted and it looked like hotel art. Great idea terrible art.
BTW a college friend of mine was an assistant to Peter Max.
Marilyn
> But, speaking of misuse, it is possible to erroneously characterize
> anything, including the system we live under, by implying that it's all bad
> because bad companies and harmful products exist. And, that any attempt to
> use the system to accomplish a goal, such as selling art, is therefore also
> bad.
Yes, that's how Capitalists judge Socialism. They think because a few people
would abuse the system, that the entire system is BAD. They take the examples of
experiments in socialism from totalitarian countries and say:
Oooo, isn't it bad? an evil empire! They don't take examples where democratic
socialism really works.
If the present Capitalist system in America is so great, why does America lead
the world in infanticide? (CNN) That fact throughout history has been indicative
of a failed social system from the Neanderthals to the present.
>
> When a single individual has an opinion, that voice is part of the fabric
> that makes up the entire system, and is therefore to be respected. However,
> it is only one voice. When getting something out to the public, millions of
> opinions must be considered - it's called marketing.
>
Yes for capitalists who don't want to make a living, they want to make a
killing.
Sure I don't blame them - luxury is very seductive, they are human. But don't
tell me it's GOOD.
>
> We could elect to change the system... that's been tried, with dismal
> results. The most powerful economic engine ever seen on the planet has been
> the free-enterprise, market-driven model.
>
Where has changing the system had dismal results? The social measures Roosevelt
implemented saved thousands of Americans from hunger and homelessness. The "most
powerful economic engine ever seen on the planet" is causing massive global
poverty and as Thomas Pynchon put it "Industrialization has laid waste America."
> Does it allow mediocrity? Yes.
> Does it allow people to get rich? Yes.
> Does it create people who are resentful? Yes.
> But it also creates the motiviation and incentive for greatness, for
> creativity, for high achievement.
>
> Or, as a group of people interested in art, we could learn to use the system
> to meet our own objectives - to sell the art that artists choose to create.
>
> The methods and techniques of marketing are well-known, including the issue
> of naming an artist and creating a brand identification in the mind of
> potential customers. The tools are on the workbench, waiting to be used,
> just as the artist's tools are at the easel, waiting to be used.
>
When you denigrate art into a commodity, you make it banal like any other
product. Haven't you heard what Andy Warhol was saying?
Why is it that artists continue to produce even when there is no market? Why are
there so many Van Gogh's today just doing it, saying to hell with the market.
Yes, I think artists deserve to be paid, well paid and perhaps the best thing
they can do is hire an agent so they don't have to do the marketing themselves.
But let's not get carried away and make this the main incentive. Some of the
most beautiful heart-wrenching work I have seen is coming out of Haiti.
>
> We could rail about the unfairness of it all, or we could use what's at our
> disposal.
>
> Barry
And yes, the whole world is at the disposal of the West (Europe and North
America.)
I mean no offence to you personally, you believe in what you are doing. I object
to your insistence that there is only one way to be an artist. In Canada there
are thousands who subsidize their work with part-time jobs. Maybe that's
possible here because we are not bankrupted everytime we get sick.
Regards,
Marilyn
Barry Stevens
> Your missing the point that is why your a marketing person and I am not.
I
> have noproblem with people earning a living of there art my self for
example.
is there own
> art unless that very market is there "art work"
What I suggested was that business, if it's as capable as it claims to be
these days, ought to be able to find customers for **whatever the artist
chooses to create.**.
> However I will not transform my self into some thing that I am not.
One of the books I'm gathering material for is on spirituality, so forgive
the slight diversion - what you are cannot be touched by anything outside of
yourself. Yeah, there's economic pressures, and a real world out there. But
what you really are, inside, eventually finds its way into what you create.
People who understand see your work and see inside you. Those who don't
understand should buy something else.
One task of marketing is to find those people who understand. Another task
is to make it easy for those people to find you. That's where branding - and
a name - change fits in. It amounts to putting up signposts on a road that
might be difficult to otherwise follow.
> For christ sake how many fricken picasso coffe cups do we need in our
cabinets.
My wife did a series of wildlife art designs for coffee cups, and they sold
thousands of copies over several years. Then tastes shifted. Coffee cups are
still being sold, perhaps even in greater numbers, except now there are
other designs, provided by other artists. People keep buying coffee cups, no
matter what. Sounds like an opportunity.
>
> There was couple of artist in NYC that did a marketing survey of what kind
of
> painting people wanted and it looked like hotel art. Great idea terrible
art.
Having artists do a marketing survey sounds just as interesting as asking
marketing people to judge art. And in New York! I worked in Manhattan for
several years, and I can envision doing surveys in the Times Square subway
station :-)
I believe that "what kind of painting people wanted" is the wrong question
for a survey. More useful questions to me would be "what interests you about
art?", "why would you buy art?", "How would you go about finding art to
buy?" or "How much do you spend on art?" Those are marketing questions.
"What people want in art" is not easy to quantify. The friend of mine who
creates the "double exposure" photographic prints sells his images because
people see them, and they react emotionally. they cry, or hug the prints.
After they hug the prints, they hug him. He found through experimentation
something that really touches people, and the work sells. He happens to be
an experienced businessman and marketing person, so he knows how to "get his
work out there". I believe that all retail (meaning "not hotel") art is sold
that way - emotional reaction.
But his work didn't change to fit the market. Once he found a style that
touched people, he set about the task of finding the rest of the people who
would also be touched.
That opportunity is available to any artist.
Barry
Barry Stevens
people
> would abuse the system, that the entire system is BAD. They take the
examples of
> experiments in socialism from totalitarian countries and say:
> Oooo, isn't it bad? an evil empire! They don't take examples where
democratic
> socialism really works.
I'm more interested in the motiviations that a system provides to create, to
build, and who benefits when that occurs. Every system created so far has
both benefits and flaws.
In my view, everyone associated with a venture should benefit from it.
Economic systems have been created as a result of "some people benefit,
others are exploited". I personally can't do anything about the "great
systems". I choose to learn the existing system, use it as well as I can,
and work to effect changes that make sense.
I can only do what I can do as an individual. As an example - a partner and
I are currently setting up an innovative franchise here in California, which
has been designed deliberatly to benefit everyone associated with the
venture - customers, employees, management, and investors. Everyone ends up
with equity. Even the customers eventually become shareholders in the
company. We started in December, and have ten stores in the chain already,
along with a significant funding committment from an investment banking
firm. The result seems to be that it will be possible to "make the pie
bigger"... by creating more wealth, everybody involved ends up with more,
rather than taking from the owners to give to the employees, or exploiting
the employees to make the owners rich. Should be a great experiment, with
our report card being in the newspapers. When it works, it can be the model
for many other businesses. Spread the model far enough, and the "system" is
changed. Perhaps continued and numerous successes folliowing such an
"everybody wins" model could serve as an example to politicians... to
international bodies...
Bringing it back from economics to what can be done locally by individuals -
once this franchise is set up and working, my partner and I will explore
using the same model to build a chain of art galleries.
>
> If the present Capitalist system in America is so great, why does America
lead
> the world in infanticide? (CNN) That fact throughout history has been
indicative
> of a failed social system from the Neanderthals to the present.
While we're at it, how about these numbers, gathered as background material
about our (USA) society for my next book:
On the personal side:
50% of marriages end in divorce
80% of the population here is in a 12-step group - or should be
2/3 of the women in an informal survey (anecdotal, gathered from
counselors),
were sexually or physically abused before they left home
On the business side:
My publisher for the business planning book did a survey for me. The
survey asked,
in 16 pages of questions, how funding sources go about funding a
business. After
sending out 3,000 questionnaires, and getting nearly 700 responses, some
more
numbers -
only 1 in 2,500 businesses looking for funding ever gets it; and
after getting it, only 1 in 5 lasts longer that 5 years
that's a combined "success rate" of 1 in 12,500!
Somehow, we as a nation have convinced ourselves that these personal and
business numbers are normal.
I think there's something wrong.
As an individual, I'm doing what I can - with books, methods, and tools,
that people can use to produce better results for themselves.
And also as an individual, I'm doing what I can to use the system to produce
better results for me and the people I work with, which means understanding
its flaws as well as its strengths and creating something that accounts for
both.
>
> Yes for capitalists who don't want to make a living, they want to make a
> killing.
> Sure I don't blame them - luxury is very seductive, they are human. But
don't
> tell me it's GOOD.
There are extremists in every system. And as you rightly point out, it isn't
always useful to judge a system by its extremes.
I have a mentor who participated in the startup of three Fortune-500
companies, names that are recognized nationwide. He's been teaching me, for
free, with only one requirement: that I in turn help others, again for free.
There's a group of semi-retired top corporate executives, based in New York,
that has 2,000 members nationwide. They have formed a non-profit service
corp, to help people get started.
Individuals within the system can, simply by their actions, change the way
the system operates.
Some people who succeed at the capital game spend their money on Lear jets
and other toys. Others spend it on useful things. The founder of Jiffy-Lube,
a retired football coach from the University of Maryland, started Jiffy
Lube. When that company went public, he took the bulk of what he made and
started Youth Services International, that builds shelters for battered
women.
>
> >
> > We could elect to change the system... that's been tried, with dismal
> > results. The most powerful economic engine ever seen on the planet has
been
> > the free-enterprise, market-driven model.
> >
>
> Where has changing the system had dismal results? The social measures
Roosevelt
> implemented saved thousands of Americans from hunger and homelessness. The
"most
> powerful economic engine ever seen on the planet" is causing massive
global
> poverty and as Thomas Pynchon put it "Industrialization has laid waste
America."
>
You're right. A short drive from my home is a massive dam built under
Roosevelt that did indeed keep many people going, and his programs pulled
the nation out of a deep depression. The capitalistic economy here had major
flaws, which later required major changes in the way the economy runs.
>
> When you denigrate art into a commodity, you make it banal like any other
> product. Haven't you heard what Andy Warhol was saying?
To me, there's a world of difference between
creating 1,000,000 prints of a cat, with big eyes,
on black velvet and selling them through K-Mart
because lots of people buy them, and
looking at the art an artist chooses to create, and
finding the customers for that art.
The first is, in my view, the commodity situation.
The second to me is something better.
>
> Why is it that artists continue to produce even when there is no market?
Why are
> there so many Van Gogh's today just doing it, saying to hell with the
market.
Because they enjoy it. Because it fulfills something within them. The market
isn't the issue.
>
> Yes, I think artists deserve to be paid, well paid and perhaps the best
thing
> they can do is hire an agent so they don't have to do the marketing
themselves.
We agree.
> But let's not get carried away and make this the main incentive.
I must admit I'm reacting to the dozens of artists I've become aware of. I
don't mean the people who are perfectly happy to do their art on time
schedules that they can manage while they keep other jobs to pay the bills.
I've met many other artists who would give anything to make art their entire
world.
But I look at the skills I have, and how they can contriibute, and get
focused on finding ways to help the people I know. I have to admit that
this does result in what looks like a single focus, perhaps even "this is
the right/only way to do things".
I meant no judgement.
>
> And yes, the whole world is at the disposal of the West (Europe and North
> America.)
Some might say the whole world is at the mercy of the West.
> I mean no offence to you personally,
None taken.
> I object
> to your insistence that there is only one way to be an artist.
See above.
> In Canada there are thousands who subsidize their work with part-time
jobs. Maybe
> that's possible here because we are not bankrupted everytime we get sick.
Medical care is only one of the things that needs to be changed "down here".
Barry
Tony Max
I assume, therefore, that you also dislike the name "Peter Max".
According to your logic, the many, wonderful, creative stars like Elton John also
cheapened their images by changing their names. (He was originally Regald Dwight).
Changing Reginald Dwight's name to Elton John allowed his fame to grow, and
allowed many more people to be inspired by his great music and creativity.
Madonna and Prince are other such examples that comes to mind.
You seem to be a pessimist.
Tony Max.
Barry Stevens
But it's hard to dialog seriously with someone who won't identify
him/herself.
And I've always hated MLM schemes.
<firs...@lastname.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b154c5...@news-server.bak.rr.com...
> In article <%FH17.733$6c1.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> barrys...@earthlink.net says...
>
> > I can only do what I can do as an individual. As an example - a partner
and
> > I are currently setting up an innovative franchise here in California,
which
> > has been designed deliberatly to benefit everyone associated with the
> > venture - customers, employees, management, and investors. Everyone ends
up
> > with equity. Even the customers eventually become shareholders in the
> > company.
>
> Sounds too much like MLM to be much of a long term success. People who
> can add become very suspicious about claims that everyone eventually
> becomes a shareholder.
>
> > The result seems to be that it will be possible to "make the pie
> > bigger"... by creating more wealth, everybody involved ends up with
more,
> > rather than taking from the owners to give to the employees, or
exploiting
> > the employees to make the owners rich.
>
> Good luck with the recruiting and the downlines and the residual income.
> Hope your sponsors didn't lie too much to you about where you are
> actually placed in the pyramid.
>
Barry Stevens
> I think they should start the job being shareholders.
Employee Stock Ownership Plan. Options to acquire shares at founder's
prices. Profit sharing. All depend on employees and management working
together to build the company value. As the value goes up, everybody
benefits.
> I've often wondered why employees 'take it' when I go into a place where
> they are working off their feet for minimum wage or a little more. It's
> not doing the employees any good when they get a rush if they are not
> tipped or have a share in the profits.
In addition to the type of compensation described above, one of the more
powerful things I've done is to provide access to the company financial
information for any employee who was interested. This allows employees to
come up with ideas that can be profitable... if they implement the idea, and
it works, they know it, we know it, and some extra profit sharing is in
order. If it doesn't work, then it's back to the drawing board for the next
idea.
>
> And in the broader view, every company should have a green plan.
It's not as simple as a green plan. The need for a green plan is a symptom
of something else. I've been involved with a lot of businesses. There hasn't
been one executive I've met who doesn't understand the need to balance many
competing forces: shareholders, management, employees, customers, the
environment, government regulations, social needs -- and stay out of jail at
the same time. The real question is HOW? Laws here are set to protect
shareholders, and if management doesn't focus on them, they're in trouble.
One way the issue is surfacing as "bringing spirituality into business" -
but there are others.
>
> > "everybody wins" model could serve as an example to politicians... to
> > international bodies...
>
> It's a mistake to think like the Bush admin. that you can run a government
> like a corporation.
I was thinking more along the lines of figuring out ways to not screw the
rest of the world... as we create wealth, ways to share it. Minimize damage.
> > Bringing it back from economics to what can be done locally by
individuals -
> > once this franchise is set up and working, my partner and I will explore
> > using the same model to build a chain of art galleries.
>
> I belong to an artist run gallery. We own the building, which is in an
> ideal location. It has its problems but I like that kind of system.
>
That's one that works here as well. Artists can own a chain as well, and the
economics work better for purchasing, etc. And, advertising for a chain is
more efficient than for one location. Instead of an opening or special event
in one locatrion, the artist has one at each location.
> Barry, infanticide is so tragic, it doesn't compare with any of the stats
> you mention below. Give me a break!
>
According to the US Dept of Justice, the number of instances of infanticide
peaked in 1996 at 400, and has declined since then. If you mean abortions,
that number is around 1.2 million.
While I'm not minimizing the importance of these data, I know that the
"other numbers" I gave touch nearly all of the population directly, with at
least one, perhaps two people in each family in some way affected.
> > I think there's something wrong.
>
> You got that right. Personally, I think the instinct to survive is good
> and useful and those who are born to wealth miss out on a great human
> challenge.
You're right. I grew up on the wrong side of the tracks, myself, and I know
what that human challenge is about. Pretty exciting.
>
> Economics, why are you Americans so fixated on "growth?"
> You know the results of steady unchecked growth and it isn't a chicken in
> every pot or pot in every chick. (Robert Kennedy)
The key word is "unchecked". Growth creates the kind of momentum on which a
society can be built. Whose society? Following which star? That's for
another newsgroup, I would think!
Barry
RBrac53660
Madonna did it for a obvious reason her relationship to sexuality and it worked
as a whole package. Believe it or not there is a concept behind Madonna.
Prince duh
Elton I dunna know
What I find distasteful is the cult of celeberty and your desire to change your
name just to make it more readable to people. Jees you could do AAAAA1 and get
the first listing in the phone book. If you used your name change in some way
to bend or twist the auidience I 'd be more then happy.
Marilyn
Yes there's a difference between rock stars/pop musicians and visual
artist/designers.
Is "Tony" short for a longer name? like Antoinette?
I liked your name Wykema, it has 3 syllables (?) and a nice ring.
Max sounds harsh. One syllable names don't have a nice ring.
Marilyn
> > And in the broader view, every company should have a green plan.
>
> It's not as simple as a green plan. The need for a green plan is a symptom
> of something else.
We must be an advanced country then, because a green plan is mandatory in the
business plan guides given out by banks. My friends and I are conscious of what
who we do business with, we always check for ethical businesses and green plans.
> I've been involved with a lot of businesses. There hasn't
> been one executive I've met who doesn't understand the need to balance many
> competing forces: shareholders, management, employees, customers, the
> environment, government regulations, social needs -- and stay out of jail at
> the same time. The real question is HOW? Laws here are set to protect
> shareholders, and if management doesn't focus on them, they're in trouble.
> One way the issue is surfacing as "bringing spirituality into business" -
> but there are others.
Yes, your main concern is profit. Oh "spirituality" is so easy isn't it?
That doesn't hurt like ethical investment or a green plan.>
> >
> I was thinking more along the lines of figuring out ways to not screw the
> rest of the world... as we create wealth, ways to share it. Minimize damage.
Why "wealth" why not just enable people to make a decent living?
> > I belong to an artist run gallery. We own the building, which is in an
> > ideal location. It has its problems but I like that kind of system.
> >
>
> That's one that works here as well. Artists can own a chain as well, and the
> economics work better for purchasing, etc. And, advertising for a chain is
> more efficient than for one location. Instead of an opening or special event
> in one locatrion, the artist has one at each location.
Most artists I know don't like chains. We are boycotting Starbucks for example
in favour of locally owned cafes.
> > Barry, infanticide is so tragic, it doesn't compare with any of the stats
> > you mention below. Give me a break!
> >
>
> According to the US Dept of Justice, the number of instances of infanticide
> peaked in 1996 at 400, and has declined since then. If you mean abortions,
> that number is around 1.2 million.
>
No, children. The United States leads the world in 2001. Would CNN lie?
<grin>
> The key word is "unchecked". Growth creates the kind of momentum on which a
> society can be built.
Unchecked population can destroy a society.
> Whose society? Following which star? That's for
> another newsgroup, I would think!
If you look at contemporary art these days, there is an amazing concern for
Life. I'm not talking about political art either.
Nice talking to you, Barry.
Barry Stevens
prevent damage.
The need to have a green plan at all stems from another problem... lack of
recognition of the importance of things that eventually made the green plan
necessary. And that lack is the actual problem.
How is it, for example, that people would ever think that it was OK to do
environmentally damaging things? What in their teaching, in their
upbringing, in their values, and in their beliefs made it OK to do things
that were harmful to the environment?
In the research I'm doing, I'm tracing a lot of things back to what goes on
in the home, as children are being raised. Lack of respect for the
environment is only the beginning.
It's been an interesting oddysey. Since most of the males in my family lived
to be over a hundred, I have quite a few more years to follow this path and
see where it leads.
--
Barry Stevens
619-697-1610
"Marilyn" <mwe...@nospamislandnet.com> wrote in message
news:3B4882F4...@nospamislandnet.com...
Tony Max
> There pretty cool names
>
> Madonna did it for a obvious reason her relationship to sexuality and it worked
> as a whole package. Believe it or not there is a concept behind Madonna.
>
> Prince duh
> Elton I dunna know
The purpose of their name changes is irrelevant, even if the reason was
self-aggrandizement. Whether or not you like their music is irrelevant, too.
The important thing is the effect that the name changes had. The effect was that
many more people derived great pleasure from the creators' creative work.
> What I find distasteful is the cult of celeberty and your desire to change your
> name just to make it more readable to people. Jees you could do AAAAA1 and get
> the first listing in the phone book.
That would too hard to pronounce. "A1" would be okay, but it sounds pompous and
it's not a person's name; it's strictly used as a business name.
> What I find distasteful is the cult of celeberty.
>
You could say, therefore, that anything that promotes the artist is distasteful
because it promotes a 'cult of celebrity'. For examples: advertising, exhibitions
-- even framing, which is designed to promote the art and is not part of the art
itself.
> If you used your name change in some way
> to bend or twist the auidience I 'd be more then happy.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. I don't want to twist people. I DO want more
people to enjoy my art.
Peter H.M. Brooks
Marilyn <mwe...@islandnet.com> wrote in message
news:3B471DE3...@islandnet.com...
> Barry Stevens wrote:
>
> > But, speaking of misuse, it is possible to erroneously characterize
> > anything, including the system we live under, by implying that it's
all bad
> > because bad companies and harmful products exist. And, that any
attempt to
> > use the system to accomplish a goal, such as selling art, is
therefore also
> > bad.
>
> Yes, that's how Capitalists judge Socialism. They think because a few
people
> would abuse the system, that the entire system is BAD. They take the
examples of
> experiments in socialism from totalitarian countries and say:
> Oooo, isn't it bad? an evil empire! They don't take examples where
democratic
> socialism really works.
>
work?
>
> If the present Capitalist system in America is so great, why does
America lead
> the world in infanticide? (CNN) That fact throughout history has been
indicative
> of a failed social system from the Neanderthals to the present.
>
The fact that the US is filled with some pretty screwed up people isn't
really an indictment of capitalism - I think that they would be in much
the same state under any system.
--
Si latet ars, prodest - Ovid
Art is a lie that makes us see the truth - Picasso
Peter H.M. Brooks
Tony Max <to...@design-write.com> wrote in message
news:3B488CBD...@design-write.com...
>. For examples: advertising, exhibitions
> -- even framing, which is designed to promote the art and is not part
of the art
> itself.
>
Tony Max
> Madonna didn't change her name! She just dropped her last name Ceconni.
> Yes there's a difference between rock stars/pop musicians and visual
> artist/designers.
What difference? The principles of publicity operate the same way for all creative
people, whether they're fine artists, musicians, actors, writers, editors, graphic
designers, illustrators, animators, filmmakers, dancers, Web site designers,
photographers, etcetera.
>
> Is "Tony" short for a longer name?
No.
> like Antoinette?
Antoinette is a female name.
>
> I liked your name Wykema, it has 3 syllables (?) and a nice ring.
Thanks. In North American (as opposed to Europe) it's pronounced Wip-KEY-ma.
It sounds weird to me and I don't like it because I got teased a lot with nicknames
like "Whipped Cream", "Whipper" and "The Whip" and I dislike it because people have
so much trouble with it,
When I call galleries and identify myself as Tony Wypkema, a frequent response is,
"Tony with who?"
You're the second person in this thread to misspell the name, which adds more weight
to my argument that it should be changed. It's spelled "Wypkema".
Trying to educate people about how to spell it, pronounce, and remember it is a
tedious battle.
>
> Max sounds harsh. One syllable names don't have a nice ring.
Thanks for the feedback. One gallery owner said he llikes the new name so much that
if I decide to revert, he wants me to call him so he can dissuade me. Obviously I
can't please everyone.
Tony Max
> Tony Max <to...@design-write.com> wrote in message
> news:3B488CBD...@design-write.com...
> >. For examples: advertising, exhibitions
> > -- even framing, which is designed to promote the art and is not part
> of the art
> > itself.
> >
> What makes you think that the frame isn't part of the art?
Frames can be optional. For instance, two days ago I saw a painting priced
at about $3,000, on a wall of an upscale gallery, with no frame on it.
The painting was painted on a canvas that's attached to strether bars that
stick out from the wall about two inches, so the artist apparently deemed
a frame to be unnecessary.
Art can be sold both framed or unframed. In either case, the painting is
considered to be finished.
One would not normally consider selling an unfinished painting, however.
Normally the frame is deemed to be an added touch, to enhance the art and
make it more presentable, and often more saleable.
>
>
Peter H.M. Brooks
> "Peter H.M. Brooks" wrote:
>
> > Tony Max <to...@design-write.com> wrote in message
> > news:3B488CBD...@design-write.com...
> > >. For examples: advertising, exhibitions
> > > -- even framing, which is designed to promote the art and is not
part
> > of the art
> > > itself.
> > >
> > What makes you think that the frame isn't part of the art?
>
> Frames can be optional. For instance, two days ago I saw a painting
priced
> at about $3,000, on a wall of an upscale gallery, with no frame on it.
>
there - isn't part of the art.
>
> The painting was painted on a canvas that's attached to strether bars
that
> stick out from the wall about two inches, so the artist apparently
deemed
> a frame to be unnecessary.
>
>
> Art can be sold both framed or unframed. In either case, the painting
is
> considered to be finished.
>
>
> One would not normally consider selling an unfinished painting,
however.
>
> Normally the frame is deemed to be an added touch, to enhance the art
and
> make it more presentable, and often more saleable.
>
seems to me, that you are enabling the purchaser to decide how to
complete the overall picture and hence the effect of the art. So, though
the contribution made to the art by the frame may not be made by the
artist, the frame is still part of the artwork as a whole. I think good
framing can improve a painting considerably - and bad framing make even
a good painting diminished in its effect.
Marilyn
I like your question. I ask myself that constantly, at what point in our history
did we begin to think of rivers as garbage channels? Did we think it would just
"go away" and now we know there is no "away." You are on to something, and its
basis I think will be a profound disrespect for Life, for living things.
in favour of what?
Money, money, money...
Marilyn
Dale Ford
trendiness about it ( a la Peter Max). Then again maybe that is what you want.
But hey I have had more than one name but they have always been mine.
Dale
Barry Stevens
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by that. I don't want to twist people. I DO
want more
> people to enjoy my art.
Aye, there's the rub.
Making your name easy find makes your name easy to find.
Signposts bring people to your gallery. Your name is one of those signposts.
It isn't unusual to learn that people don't really, deep down inside,
regardless of what they say, want recognition. There are many reasons for
this, deep down inside each person, and uncovering them isn't the proper
function of this or any other newsgroup. I can only say that this deep down
aversion has led, for many people I know personally, to many and varied
reasons to not have their work, or their businesses, or their lives be a
success. On the surface, however, it shows as modesty, as a feeling that "it
isn't right to toot my own horn":, or "I can't charge what my work is really
worth". It also shows as anger, or resentment, or hostility, when OTHER
people DO manage to step out into the light.
Everyone has the opportunity to step out into the light.
Everyone deserves the respect of others for their work.
Everyone deserves the right to derive the value they choose to derive from
their work.
Go for it.
Barry
Barry Stevens
> Thanks for the feedback. One gallery owner said he llikes the new name so
much that
> if I decide to revert, he wants me to call him so he can dissuade me.
Obviously I
> can't please everyone.
Now you've got it. Test it, and see how it works. Good show!
Barry
Barry Stevens
society thinking that there is no connection between us and anything or
anyone else.
That includes the money thing. We have placed such heavy judgements on
money - or the lack of it - and such importance on its accumulation - that
it distorts the true meaning of Life, and screws up the process of living.
If we saw ourselves as being connected to everyone on the planet, we'd soon
realize that the crap we're dumping in a river winds up in someone else's
drinking water. The stuff we're dumping in the air winds up in someone
else's lungs. And the stuff we send into the upper atmosphere is raising the
earth's temperature, melting polar caps, raising the ocean levels, and is
already destroying fragile marshlands. I live in a valley near the ocean,
and sooner or later, that raising ocean level is going to move the shoreline
to my front yard.
If we saw ourselves as being connected to everyone on the planet, we'd see
that the anger, the violence, the disrespect, the "feeling of less than"
that we dump on other people will eventually grab hold of their hearts - and
ours.
If we saw ourselves as being connected to everyone on the planet, we'd
understand what we're doing to our children.
And that's only the tip of the iceberg.
Thanks for listening. I just spent the day with one of the more advanced new
thought communities here in Southern California. Imagine a four-hour picnic
filled with discussion like this.
I'm ready for another glass of wine.
Barry
"Marilyn" <mwe...@islandnet.com> wrote
Marilyn
>
Barry,
I agree that almost everyone wants some kind of recognition of their existence,
then maybe their work.
> Everyone has the opportunity to step out into the light.
>
> Everyone deserves the respect of others for their work.
>
> Everyone deserves the right to derive the value they choose to derive from
> their work.
>
This is annoying. It's positive thinking gone wild. Some people deserve no
respect for their awful work.
I have no respect for the work of Bateman, Kincaid, Gacey, Toller Cranston and
many others who just make commercial pick-chures. As Chet Atkins used to say
"Fight mediocrity, tooth and nail."
> Go for it.
Spend a lot of time perfecting your work, after a few good critiques from
colleagues whom you respect, have a studio show. Have many studio shows. Spend
more time perfecting your work than marketing.
Marilyn
>
>
>
Sharon Barcone
Marilyn wrote in message <3B49D47A...@islandnet.com>...
>This is annoying. It's positive thinking gone wild. Some people deserve no
>respect for their awful work.
>
>I have no respect for the work of Bateman, Kincaid, Gacey, Toller Cranston
and
>many others who just make commercial pick-chures. As Chet Atkins used to
say
>"Fight mediocrity, tooth and nail."
Just because you dislike or disrespect some artists doesn't mean everyone
should follow suite.
I will speak in particular is Kincade. Though some put down this artist as
decorative, commercial or kitsch, he has a following. It is his mass
commercial marketing that is often cited as good reason to disregard his
work. This has happened to many artists who have found financial success in
mass marketing. I believe however that his work has a good foundation in art
education. His compositions are based on sound artist principles. His
technique is often filled with stippleing which is considered to be amoung
the best of techniques for creating long lasting works. And his works find a
wide popularity with those who desire art that embraces "beauty" in
expression.
I have seen some for his not as well known works that are not so glitzy and
are appealing. And though I do not particularly care for most of his work, I
do respect his efforts and accomplishments.
>
>> Go for it.
>
>Spend a lot of time perfecting your work, after a few good critiques from
>colleagues whom you respect, have a studio show. Have many studio shows.
Spend
>more time perfecting your work than marketing.
>
>Marilyn
I will vote in favor of "Tony Max", it has a nice sound and I see no reason
not to creating a marketing name based on your own name.
The important thing is to continue to grow as an artist even after your name
is recognized and not rest on name recognition as the avenue to sales as
Peter Max has done.
sharon
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Vincent Scaum
Signature "Welcome to Vincentdirect.com the online service that provides
affordable online computer training streamed over the Internet into your
computer at home, at work or at the office. Our employee corporate packages
cater for employers' needs, and we also supply packages for schools. Explore
our ebusiness pages to learn more about us!" LEADING NETWORKER Willing to
teach and show proven System to help build massive World-wide Internet
Business. PHENOMENAL RESIDUAL INCOME POTENTIAL. For free info pack. Email
letthegoo...@talk21.com a phenomenal opportunity. ------- Visit
www.vincentdirect.com and talk with me between 20.00hrs & 22.00 hrs
GMT ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Add the HumanClick "Click to Chat" button to your own e-mails for free at
www.humanclick.com ---------------------------------------------------------
----------------- Add the HumanClick "Click to Chat" button to your own
e-mails for free at www.humanclick.com
<firs...@lastname.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b154c5...@news-server.bak.rr.com...
> In article <%FH17.733$6c1.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> barrys...@earthlink.net says...
>
and
> > I are currently setting up an innovative franchise here in California,
which
> > has been designed deliberatly to benefit everyone associated with the
> > venture - customers, employees, management, and investors. Everyone ends
up
> > with equity. Even the customers eventually become shareholders in the
> > company.
>
> can add become very suspicious about claims that everyone eventually
> becomes a shareholder.
>
> > bigger"... by creating more wealth, everybody involved ends up with
more,
> > rather than taking from the owners to give to the employees, or
exploiting
> > the employees to make the owners rich.
>
Barry Stevens
>
> This is annoying. It's positive thinking gone wild. Some people deserve no
> respect for their awful work.
>
> I have no respect for the work of Bateman, Kincaid, Gacey, Toller Cranston
and
> many others who just make commercial pick-chures. As Chet Atkins used to
say
> "Fight mediocrity, tooth and nail."
>
You and I have each seen work that has been truly awful, at least in our
opinion. And we've probably seen awful work that has been an economic
success. (did you say "Kincaide"?)
The determination that work is "awful" is, unfortunately, subjective. I know
what I like, and you know what you like, based on what we each know about
art. But there are millions of people out there who know what THEY like,
too.
You yourself have suggested most of the answer:
> Spend a lot of time perfecting your work, after a few good critiques from
> colleagues whom you respect, have a studio show. Have many studio shows.
Spend
> more time perfecting your work than marketing.
>
The rest of the answer, I suggest, is this: after you have produced what YOU
feel is worthy of respect, then make sure it gets "out there". If you can
get it in front of "the millions", you just might have a shot at changing
what THEY think is "good art".
How does it "get out there?" Ahh, we're back in the circle again.
And yes, it is positive thinking. Even perhaps "gone wild" by "average"
standards.
Please don't take this next thought personally. After working with many,
many people across the country, I've learned that I most annoy those people
who have not as yet been able to have any real positive impact -- on their
lives, professions, or the society around them. They have lost, had beaten
out of them, or perhaps never had, the feeling that such impact or change is
possible. They may have lost sight of who they really are, or who or what
they could become. I always believe that the people with whom I work are,
in their own worlds and in their own way, capable of positive
accomplishment, even greatness. I've been surrounding myself with such
people for many years. I know that it's possible.
Perhaps one of the most difficult of ideas for most people to accept is
this:
The distance between the 'average person' and greatness is only
1/4-inch.
The guy that started Fortune-500 companies is, after everything is said and
done, just another guy.
Barry
Tony Max
>
> I agree with Marilyn it would sound better if you were like Anthony Max, Tony Max has a
> trendiness about it ( a la Peter Max). Then again maybe that is what you want.
In changing my business name, I'm not concerned with fashion.
Tony is my real, first name and I don't want to change it. I don't like
Anthony because it sounds stuffy and formal. To me, Tony sounds
friendly, down-to-earth and approachable (which is what I am).
Tony Max
Thanks, Barry.
So far, I've gotten a mixed reaction. Then I thought, that's the same
with my art: some people love it and some don't. And it's the same way
with my life: no matter what I do, there will always be people who disapprove.
So I have to do what seems right to me.
A couple of days ago, I introduced myself and my "Tony Max" inkjet-
printed portfolio to a dealer I didn't know and explained about my name
change, and he said "But there's a Peter Max".
I was chagrined and decided to drop the name change.
Then it occurred to me that there are several musicians who have the
same name, and nobody complains about that.
For example: Natalie Cole and her father Nat King Cole were famous long
before Holly Cole came into the music business.
There's a Phil Collins and there's a Judy Collins.
There's a Carol King and there's a B.B. King.
There's a James Brown, a Jackson Brown and The Family Brown.
And I'm sure there are lots of other examples of famous people who
aren't related to one another who are stars in creative fields.
So why can't there be a Peter Max and a Tony Max?
Tony Max
Tony Max
> not to creating a marketing name based on your own name.
> The important thing is to continue to grow as an artist even after your name
> is recognized and not rest on name recognition as the avenue to sales as
> Peter Max has done.
>
> sharon
Thanks, Sharon.
Yes; I hope I don't become complacent, like some artists I know of, who
succeeded with a certain subject matter and style, and now every picture
they paint looks formulaic.
I try to make every painting I paint look unlike anything I've painted before.
Tony
Tony Max
> colleagues whom you respect, have a studio show. Have many studio shows. Spend
> more time perfecting your work than marketing.
>
> Marilyn
Why studios shows? Why not gallery shows?
Tony
Joseph Bennett
If there can be a Tony Bennett, and a Joe Bennett (and there most certainly are),
then you sure as blazes can have a Peter Max and Tony Max, and any number of other
Max's.
One suggestion: Don't "explain" about your name. Just be Tony Max and get on
with it. Within my experience, the minute explanations start, expert opinions
start to flow. Who needs them?
Good luck....
Joe (Not Tony) Bennett
Tony Max
> with it. Within my experience, the minute explanations start, expert opinions
> start to flow. Who needs them?
The purpose of the discussion about adopting the name "Tony Max" for my
fine art business was to get feedback.
If everyone thought it was a bad idea (and if the reasons were strong
enough) I wouldn't have used the new name.
The opinions expressed by other people here have been useful, just as
they are useful in a market survey.
Tony Max
>
> Spend
> more time perfecting your work than marketing.
>
> Marilyn
Why?
I'm a one-man operation and I need to spend plenty of time on marketing,
expecially because I'm still trying to figure out what will work.
Is there a general rule of business that a company should spend more
time in production than marketing?
Tony Max
> Coke & Pepsi.
Thanks, Marilyn.
Millions of people perceive Coke and Pepsi to be of value, and millions
of people perceive art to be of value. The value is in the eye (or
tastebuds) of the beholder.
Products DO matter to companies that care about quality.
> This is a fine arts newsgroup and I was directing my advice to artists in
> general not one single business man whatever his name is.
>
> Marilyn
Keep in mind, though, that fine art can be a profession as well as a hobby.
There is no conflict between being a businessman and a fine artist. In
fact, if there were no possibility of earning money from my art, I
wouldn't be able to afford to do it fulltime.
Barry Stevens
---production time to create quality art;
---marketing time to sell stuff, so the artist can eat.
Or, the alternative, split the production time available in Life between:
---production of art; and
---production of money.
As has been pointed out, either approach works.
The choice is the artist's, alone.
--
Barry Stevens
"Tony Max" <to...@design-write.com> wrote in message
news:3B4C5B49...@design-write.com...
Dale Ford
Dale
Dale Ford
I know you didn't mean that. Make money from art good for you. Some here are
more worried about creating art than a positive cash flow. I am one of them. I
could easily make big bucks following marketing trends in art. Not hard.
I guess this whole conversation is what is more important to you?
Quality in art is a relative term. Commercial success rarely guarantees quality.
Dale
lauri levanto
"Dale Ford" <bdf...@mb.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3B4E56A5...@mb.sympatico.ca...
> Hobby??????
> I know you didn't mean that. Make money from art good for you. Some here
are
> more worried about creating art than a positive cash flow. I am one of
them. I
> could easily make big bucks following marketing trends in art. Not hard.
>
> I guess this whole conversation is what is more important to you?
>
> Quality in art is a relative term. Commercial success rarely guarantees
quality.
>
Commercial failure guarantees it even less:-p
At least here in Scandinavia an artist has four options
1. to sell
2. search grants
3. Be supported by someone
4. Earn money fulltime and make art part-time
The last two are amateur approach (amateur in the literal sense
=making art because one loves it)
The first two are professional. Selling pieces to people is
called commercial, selling CV's and projects to boards
is politically correct - as long as your works are
politically correct.
If you sell to the markets, you can choose your clientele,
that is you decide what kind of art to make.
If you sell to boards and jurors, your hands
are bound.
-lauri
Tony Max
>
> No you might not be concerned with fashion but the name definitely gives that impression.
> Dale
Thanks, Dale.
Does the name Peter Max give the impression that Peter Max is concerned
with fashion?
Do you think that "Peter Max" is a nom de plume?
When I first heard of Peter Max, I thought that "Max" is his real,
original surname. Now I'm not sure.
But I looked in my phone book and saw that there were three people in my
city with the surname "Max", so it is apparently a real surname.
Tony