Baren Digest                Friday, 25 July 2003        Volume 24 : Number 2317


----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Sharri LaPierre <Barebonesart#comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 16:16:22 -0700
Subject: [Baren 22339] Re: Baren Digest V24 #2316 

Myron,

Of course, you are absolutely correct in your description of the 
deconstructionist philosophy, however, several critics writing for Art 
News, Art in America, etc. have appropriated it and attached to a 
variety of conceptual artists.  It may be their assumption that this 
philosophy also applies to the artist's mind-set, or from their own 
perspective, to the work they're viewing.  Thanks for helping to make 
it more clear. If we work together we may get this all sorted out, yet!

I love Julio's math - now if I could just get a few more editions to 
sell out I could ascribe a decent wage to some of the hours I work.  
And I do classify it as "work" even if I do love every minute of it.  
My father loved his work, too - he told me when I was a wee lass that 
he was the luckiest man alive to be doing work he loves and would 
gladly do for nothing, and getting paid for it.  Like that old adage, 
being paid to eat ice cream.  And this from a man who was orphaned at 9 
yrs., raised in an orphanage during the depression, ran away to support 
and educate himself at 16 (plus take care of a younger brother) -- 
point being: he did not have an easy life. But, he did well and was 
supremely happy. I wish all of you that same degree of happiness!

Hi Bill R - always love your contributions-

Happy printing!
Just call me Pollyanna,
  Sharri


------------------------------

From: Aqua4tis#aol.com
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 19:24:05 EDT
Subject: [Baren 22340] Re: Hooray for printmakers 



i would love a discussion on not only gruen  but on shoengauer as well


------------------------------

From: Mike Lyon <mikelyon#mlyon.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 18:18:34 -0500
Subject: [Baren 22341] Re: print prices 

At 07:40 AM 7/25/2003 +0900, Dave Bull wrote:

>It becomes a question of MIke's comment:

>>Whatever the market will bear!

>
>But think about the implicit philosophy that is actually present in that 
>statement; when you say "Whatever the market will bear" you are actually 
>saying "I want to transfer as much money as possible from that guy's 
>pocket to mine!" Mike, I _know_ that's not why you make prints, so why say 
>something like that?


When I said that, Dave, I was responding (quite efficiently, I thought) to 
your question, "What _is_ a reasonable price for a woodblock print?"  As I 
may have mentioned before, I think there are (at least) two activities 
involved in your question, "making print" and "selling print".  In my mind 
these do _not_ necessarily go hand in hand, but can be separate and 
unrelated -- especially if we begin to talk about "Art" as something which 
might be outside the cultural structure of commerce.


>Why not say something like "I love designing these prints, and I love 
>making these prints, and I would love for as many people as possible to 
>share these pleasures with me!"


I definitely share the first two impulses (design and make).  The third, "I 
would love for as many people as possible to share these pleasures with 
me," is something quite different, I think -- there's more of a performance 
component, but still not necessarily a commerce component.  But when you 
start to talk about pricing...  Well, that's pure commerce!  As for 
pricing...   Right now, your prints are not "fully" subscribed.  But if you 
had a waiting list of 10,000 (or name your unreasonably high number which 
you wouldn't want to print), and followed your 'just enough to live on' 
pricing strategy, then you'd _lower_  your price (or even leave it the 
same) in the face of the increased demand, and some enterprising person(s) 
would begin to fulfill the pent-up demand for your prints by immediately 
reselling your prints at whatever price the market would 
bear.  Duh!    :-)    Ever watch ticket scalpers before a sold-out 
performance?  Be interesting to see how you (hopefully) will actually 
handle your eventual max'ed out capacity in the face of exponentially 
growing demand.

- -- Mike


Mike Lyon
mailto:mikelyon#mlyon.com
http://www.mlyon.com  

------------------------------

From: michael schneider <mikasch#t0.or.at>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 01:43:07 +0200
Subject: [Baren 22342] Re: print prices 

Dear David,

liked your example with the cars, but I have to make a slight correction 
in it. The thing with supply and demand is more like: look we have about 
5 people to buy the last two ferrari gto 540 ( don't quote me on the 
numbers and names of ferraris, I have no idea.). That's the market the 
price is adjusted to and not the supply of Porsches that might be 
possible at the same time.
It not a Bull print versus a Yuki print.
I was talking about the art market. A thing that might have to do a lot 
with art production, for artists who have chosen the "market" as their 
field for expression, but usually is not of much concern to the artist.
On the other hand, when the market offers tools that might make it 
possible for me to earn more money with my work, should I object? And 
who does not like the thought that people are willing to pay more money 
for your work than you ever thought they would?
There is one universal rule for art and prices! "Rules are useless."

Barbara : I need to tell you that in Europe there is some support for 
the arts, but I have seldom benefited from that. It will take to much 
time and band width to explain the strange and unbelievable structures 
and lobbies, major players and key persons in that game as well as the 
basic strategy of the political parties that are involved and how they 
decide to handle the thing.
Fact is, for nine years my wife and I made a living based on 
printmaking. When times have been rough, I worked as designer for 
advertising  companies, part time teacher,  web designer, painted 
portraits, designed CD- Covers and so on.
I have no intention to assume the position of the "European speaker", as 
things are different in different European countries, but in Austria, 
the state has to make up somehow for an art market that is not fully 
developed.

Sharri, you are almost right, the name is Anselm Kiefer ( lit.: pine). 
Myron gave a great description of the philosophy of deconstructivism.

Yours,

michael


David Bull wrote:


> Michael wrote:
>

>> To the prices; as with all other things, supply and demand make the 
>> price.

>
>
> This, I think, is only true for those areas where the same product is 
> available on the market from different suppliers - I mean something 
> like a loaf of bread, or a car. The different suppliers are competing 
> with each other to bring essentially the same thing to market, so yes, 
> the market does set the price - if any supplier sets his price too 
> high, the buyers will go to his competitors.
>
> But _are_ woodblock prints from different makers the 'same product'? 
> It would seem not, not when we have David Bull prints at $50~60, and 
> Rei Yuki prints at $1500 side by side on the market. You might answer 
> "This is just like cars - there are Volkswagens and there are 
> Rolls-Royces!", but I think that would be a misleading comparison - 
> there is basically no inherent 'quality' difference in the two prints!
>
> It becomes a question of MIke's comment:
>

>> Whatever the market will bear!

>
>
> But think about the implicit philosophy that is actually present in 
> that statement; when you say "Whatever the market will bear" you are 
> actually saying "I want to transfer as much money as possible from 
> that guy's pocket to mine!" Mike, I _know_ that's not why you make 
> prints, so why say something like that?
>
> Why not say something like "I love designing these prints, and I love 
> making these prints, and I would love for as many people as possible 
> to share these pleasures with me!"
>
> Just over four years ago, when I 'did the spreadsheet' to work out 
> what the price of my Surimono Album would have to be - balancing all 
> the costs against my living expenses - I tried to find the _lowest 
> possible level_ for the price. "How inexpensive can I get these 
> things, and still be able to make a living at this?"
>
> Sure I'd like to get money ... of course I need money ... (especially 
> after just shelling out all the bux for my daughter to join a Maritime 
> Workers Union (!)) ... but I just _can't_ feel that these little 
> scraps of paper are in any way 'worth' the kind of $ that are quoted 
> on the website we saw yesterday.
>
> Make them good!  Make them affordable!  and Make a _boatload_ of 
> them!   _That's_ what woodblock printmaking is about!
>
> Julio wrote:
>

>> in that same example, if you were to charge $1500 per print,
>> it is the equivalent of someone making $3000 per hour !!!!!!

>
>
> Actually Julio, I think that this is 'jumping to conclusions'. The 
> 'price per hour' charged by any skilled worker of course reflects the 
> level of skill required in performing the job - and this must include 
> amortization of all the years of training required to reach that level 
> of skill. If you do the math, you would find that even at my low (?) 
> price levels, the $ per hour is still quite substantial!
>
> (Hope everybody understands that I _do_ have respect for people on the 
> other side of this discussion, even though I can't get my head around 
> their way of thinking!)
>
> Dave
>
>




------------------------------

From: Emkaygee#aol.com
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 20:02:06 EDT
Subject: [Baren 22343] Re: Baren Digest V24 #2316 

Hi Everyone!
You are all such prolific posters......it's really hard to keep up!
Just a few quick comments:
It is always interesting to read all of the posts, but a few really caught my 
attention.
In a discussion about print pricing, Mike said:<<Same as for ANY other 
item-of-commerce in our current free-market economy!  Whatever the market will bear! 

>>

VERY true! We usually carry prints as an affordable alternative to an 
expensive painting or drawing. One artist that we carry in our inventory sells his 
paintings for upwards of $50,000 apiece, so in comparison a $3000 print is 
considered an "affordable" way to own one of his works. I can't afford them, but 
selling them makes for a pretty good "day job". : )
I think Barbara really hit it on the head when she said:
<< It has been my experience and that of most artists I know that as soon as 
you start thinking about making work you think someone will buy, your work 
just goes downhill and no one buys it at all. So I guess we make it to make it 
and sales are the icing on the cake...   >>
Also very true...those high end guys have people to fret for them, so they 
can go about making art exclusively. In the end, you have to remain true to 
yourself and your work.
I also love reading about printmaking history and philosophy!
Bill I LOVE your posts! So much to think about and so well written!
When I read yesterdays post, I came to the conclusion that perhaps my view of 
drawing / painting / printmaking and their relationship to each other is 
influenced by  hybrid usages (i.e. those of Jasper Johns or Raushenberg) where 
printmaking is used interchangably with paint, pencil, and charcoal........ 
I've never thought of the hand being a matrix in itself, rather a tool, an 
extention of the artist......Handprints are definately a different way of making 
an image. They are of course considered printmaking, but could they also be 
considered painting at this primitive stage? 
<<Then we notice that some are using their hands as stencils and as
imprinters--you get the picture: Handprints. Silhouettes and relief prints,
in other words, quite a different way to shape an image--don't you agree?>>
I love you guys.....these are some great posts!
Mary : )

------------------------------

From: David Bull <davebull#woodblock.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:22:26 +0900
Subject: [Baren 22344] Re: print prices 

Mike wrote:

> ... if you had a waiting list of 10,000 (or name your unreasonably high 
> number which you wouldn't want to print), and followed your 'just 
> enough to live on' pricing strategy, then you'd _lower_  your price (or 
> even leave it the same) in the face of the increased demand, and some 
> enterprising person(s) would begin to fulfill the pent-up demand for 
> your prints by immediately reselling your prints at whatever price the 
> market would bear.


and Michael wrote:

> look we have about 5 people to buy the last two ferrari gto 540 ( don't 
> quote me on the numbers and names of ferraris, I have no idea.). That's 
> the market the price is adjusted to and not the supply of Porsches that 
> might be possible at the same time.


May I try to respond to these two things at the same time? Both of you 
are making sound arguments for your position, but underlying these is a 
fundamental assumption which my own argument does not share.

You speak of demand from the market ...  But because this market is just 
'people' - as in 'those people out there somewhere' ... faceless and 
unnamed, you can speak of 'what the market will bear ...' or '5 people 
to buy the last ferrari ...' without any thought of these people as 
'people'.  Sure, put the price up, _somebody_ will walk in the door one 
day and buy it ...  Because of the impersonality implicit in the 
phrasing, it doesn't seem important to really think about what we are 
saying.

But think about my situation: Mr. Cho the baker has been collecting my 
prints for many years. He's not a 'market force', he's a collector of my 
prints. When I started the Surimono Albums he listened to my 
description, saw the price, and decided to collect them. I said "6000 
yen", he said "Seems OK", and we had a deal. But if we project out into 
the future, to some point where I become fully subscribed, if I then 
allow 'market forces' and 'supply and demand' to come into play, then I 
would be in the position of calling him up and saying "By the way, Mr. 
Cho, starting with the next album, the price is going to be 12,000 yen 
for each print - you see, there are a lot of people trying to buy these 
things these days ..."  How could I possibly justify such a thing? How 
can the presence/absence of any number of other collectors possibly 
affect the value that he and I had decided upon when he started 
collecting my prints?  I'm happy to take 6000 yen for each one, only 
until the 201st person wants to sign up ... from that point on, my price 
starts to climb?

How on earth can the presence/absence of other copies of a print affect 
the intrinsic value/pleasure to be received when owning one? And how 
could I ever make such a price increase for my _collectors_ - real 
'people', not a collective 'market'?

Is my argument becoming a tad incoherent?  Maybe so ... I apologize!  
Prints ... multiples ... are slippery things, difficult to get a handle 
on - there are many very interesting ways to look at them and think 
about them, and of course each one of us will answer these questions in 
a different way.

Mike added:

> Be interesting to see how you (hopefully) will actually handle your
> eventual max'ed out capacity in the face of exponentially growing 
> demand.


The demand is certainly not exponential - but this is a very pointed 
question. We've had big talk from Dave, but what will he really do when 
('if', of course) he reaches 200 collectors for his Surimono Albums? At 
present, what can I say ... I don't spend too much time 'counting 
chickens', so haven't given this much thought ... but I guess the answer 
is simple - nothing. I'll keep the price the same, will start a waiting 
list, and will try and think of some way to keep the 'waiters' happy 
while waiting (once a year draw from their names and send some free 
prints, or something like that ...).

But here I am, doing just what I said I wouldn't do - counting 
chickens!  Cluck cluck!

:-)

Dave


------------------------------

End of Baren Digest V24 #2317
*****************************