Again l think the most important thing we can do as fine art photographers is to demand excellence and originality from our work. Make your work stand out not because it's marketed well or super polished but because it's extraordinarily compelling. Realize that no matter how good we might think we are, you can always be so much better.
It's the same with any industry really. Talent only gets you so far. You need the right connections and the right doors to open as well. Interesting topic and I'm glad you did it as I'm more interested in fine art than commerical.
You know what I really like about how you explain things? You split an object in two parts... The first is usually what you might not want, and then you explain how you can still be successfull that way, then you address what might be the better option, and then explain how near impossible it is to get there. Essentially providing a HUGE range of options, while warning for pros and cond each. And in just 10 to 15 minutes. (or even les sin this case!)
Looking forward to your next video. Really like to hear your views opinions, and advice on topics such as the fine art market and artist representation.
Great episode Ted. Mirrors my thoughts pretty much exactly. One thing I'd like to say though is that I think there is a bit of confusion about the concept of "fine art". I tend to think of "fine art" as highly processed images taken with expensive lenses. It's a bit of an internet convenience for classifying stuff. Then there is "art" which, in the case of photography, is simply imaging generally using photographic methods rather than traditional paints. Of course there is an infinite number of variations to this and the trick is to simply throw off the shackles. Cameraless photography really highlights the differences between the two fields for me. Once again Ted, you are excelling in this and I'm watching episodes like this one sitting on the edge of my seat. Can't wait for the next one on high end art (and I'm not confused about what that means!).
I never gave a thought about it but you're right. In reputed Galleries, today's fine art photographers are effectively competing against giants from the past. What that says, is that we still can learn from those past artists. Newcomers tend to observe the ongoing trend and try to develop their talent from that starting point. They partly ignore the artistic movements that brought about famed and talented photographers. For my part, I have two distinct digital photography collections. One with recent artists and another of images from the 19th century onward. I have found out that I feel more inspired by photographs within my older collection. That is not to say that there are not great artists today, far from that, but few stand the test of time (as it probably was in the past). And thanks to you Ted, we look back at those giants that inspired past and new generations. I can't wait for your next podcast on "High End of Art Market". My guess is that your quote "Less adventurous taste" will take all its meaning (on the buyer's side) and that we will hear about "gambling stocks".
Hi Ted . I have enjoyed your show for some time now , as an amateur photographer , well that is kindo easy to do , turning pro at 55 years old , well I really know where you are coming from in this episode . For my part returning home to my wee Village in Scotland I find myself making photographs to touch the emotions of people who have lived here all there lives and visitors with local landscape in a way which I know is not "art", but means something to folks , scenes they have lived in yet never seen the way I photograph them just by putting in effort , but let us define "art" , art is communication , it is communicating more in a very special and subjective voice , that being said , I have no desire to make huge amounts of money so I can return to the principles I had as an amateur and wish to do both ends of the spectrum in this episode . For influence on the work I wish to do from my own heart I look to Jozef Sudec , such emotional photographs , raw on the basics of live with wonderful use of light and shadow. Whatever I do it will be for love the of it , for people, and the work I do to my taste from my heart will be for art .
I really appreciate these videos on the business of photography. I am at a place where I see I can make money doing high volume portraits, but my hear is more in creating more artistic environmental portraits and still lifes for people with passionate hobbies.
Very interesting topic. I learned about Gursky’s Rhein II in a photography salon I attended recently. Seeing it sparked my curiosity to learn more about why it was so attractive for the buyer to pay so much. I have heard others say the same with Dutch painters. What you say makes sense.
You seem very preoccupied about not creating illusions. This duty is now fulfilled. Nevertheless the questions are about how to make it, not the uncountable ways to fail. Photography in 2015 generates a lot of business. So, a lot of people, you yourself included, actually can make a living out of it. There are more than one legitimate way to make it in that domain. Few can be Kenna or Arbus (probably fewer still want that in the latter case) but many may still want to be affiliated with photography in one role or another. Wouldn't it be nice to turn to success stories now that the horror has been duly laid out ?
MrKikoboy To achieve the goal related to photography that one has set for oneself. For myself it would be to publish my photography, i.e. the one that meets my criterias, and to sell enough of it to earn a living. I do not expect to become famous but a job as a stock photographer would be awfully nice. I wouldn't mind a few weddings here and there if I become good at it. There are actually wedding photographers that I'd definitely call artists.
What u said is true of many art forms especially music. Nobody plays instrument anyone. I'm a jazz fan. Especially classic Jazz favorite artist is Coltrane who believed in practice. A curse word to many now..
Great episode (as ever) Ted. This is the realm of photography I am very interested in and currently trying to go down. However I do view it as more of a passion project than part of my career. I had one gallery representation, i've got 2 pieces in a show next month, and a pending application for an Art Fair.....do I expect to sell loads or prints and high value? Nope.... Just knowing that some of work is out there would be enough for me, and anything else would be a bonus :)
Yes. I know one person who travels round "art fairs" selling prints. Kitch (usually overdone HDR) landscapes and animals but some "high art" items. He knows what sells to the "general public". I have several friends who are trying to make it as artists showing work in galleries and coffee shops and elsewhere. I am unclear how much of a success they will be.
Brian Richman Hello Brian, The "general public" may not be the best place to be judge as a fine art artist but it is where you can make money. There are many ways to sell your "art" or sell your "soul". I read a recent article this year where one photographer (forgot the name) signed an exclusive contract with IKEA for selling his photographs mounted on canvas. What I define as "decorative art". I am sure he is making lots of money. And my guess is that he can still be creative within the limited expectations of the general public.
I don't generally sell my art, but I know many do sell a product as a way to pay the bills, not really selling their souls, just being pragmatic. Decorative is certainly what the general public like, and as I imply, often quite vomit inducing.
Brian Richman You're quite right when you say that they are just being pragmatic else they would probably starving. It's not really about selling your soul but surviving. When commenting, we sometime like to project what the ideal world could be and forget the harsh realities. And I was being gentle when talking about decorative art, it seems you pick up on that.
For obvious reasons, art has always been a vehicle for money laundering. You touched on that some what. The part that confuses me is where trustees or board members buy a piece of art and then donate it to the museum. A case in my area is that the museum has artists donate their work for an auction. This donation is free, but the auction raises tens of thousands of dollars. People purchase the art and then donate it to the museum's collection, for free? This always seems to happen around the end of the year and I suspect it's some type of tax write off. Do you have any information on that? A lot of this stuff is pretty shady imho and it's really annoying when the artists are left with nothing.
John Mason There's 2 possibilities. First is a tax write-off and a hand in the museum for donors. Auctions are different - they ask the artists to donate the work for either charity or museum fundraising. Younger artists will do anything to be associated with the artists the museum already has a relationship with. The second is a "bequest" or essentially a promise that the art will go there one day. Bequests are loans with promised gifts. They're not very solid and can be taken away - again because the market is not regulated. As for the laundering - I've heard collectors say that if the government stepped in the entire market would collapse. More than just a bubble under there ;-)
Hi Ted. Remaining in the fine art world, i'd like to know your opinion on digital art photography. Not just retouching, but actually altering the image (i.e adding elements not present in the shot). Bottom line: to you where's the threshold between the purity of the photographic work and the need to alter the image in order to tell a visual story or transmit a feeling? Thank you. Alberto.
Ted... I get what you're saying about kitsch galleries. I live in Palm Springs, and we certainly have a couple of those here in my city. However... I think you might've been a bit unfair in comparing Peter Lik to the likes of Thomas Kinkade. Lik, at least, has some artistic validity and has some shots that are not what I would call "groundbreaking", but are certainly respectable. Kinkade, on the other hand... is nothing less than the Anti-Christ of the art world. His brush never touched canvas without creating something insipid.
Now this is an interesting topic... I'm an art student in Switzerland, studying contemporary art. My work has naturally turned to the photographic medium, I'm shooting with a Mamiya RB67 and a Rolleicord, you can check it out here if you're interested: vxphotography.tumblr.com/ The school itself (its teachers) can't or won't teach us about the art world, the galleries, who to talk to, where to go or what to do to get started, how to survive as an artist. Or anything else really... it's just a place where you get more or less relevant critique and a Bachelors degree if you're lucky. Would you do an episode for aspiring artist on how to get started? Thanks again for all the shows! Vx
Again l think the most important thing we can do as fine art photographers is to demand excellence and originality from our work. Make your work stand out not because it's marketed well or super polished but because it's extraordinarily compelling. Realize that no matter how good we might think we are, you can always be so much better.
Yes sir 💯%
Also, get involved and evolve yourself. That alone brings connections and your work will be out there as well.
It's the same with any industry really. Talent only gets you so far. You need the right connections and the right doors to open as well.
Interesting topic and I'm glad you did it as I'm more interested in fine art than commerical.
You know what I really like about how you explain things? You split an object in two parts... The first is usually what you might not want, and then you explain how you can still be successfull that way, then you address what might be the better option, and then explain how near impossible it is to get there. Essentially providing a HUGE range of options, while warning for pros and cond each. And in just 10 to 15 minutes. (or even les sin this case!)
Looking forward to your next video. Really like to hear your views opinions, and advice on topics such as the fine art market and artist representation.
Great episode Ted. Mirrors my thoughts pretty much exactly. One thing I'd like to say though is that I think there is a bit of confusion about the concept of "fine art". I tend to think of "fine art" as highly processed images taken with expensive lenses. It's a bit of an internet convenience for classifying stuff. Then there is "art" which, in the case of photography, is simply imaging generally using photographic methods rather than traditional paints. Of course there is an infinite number of variations to this and the trick is to simply throw off the shackles. Cameraless photography really highlights the differences between the two fields for me.
Once again Ted, you are excelling in this and I'm watching episodes like this one sitting on the edge of my seat. Can't wait for the next one on high end art (and I'm not confused about what that means!).
I never gave a thought about it but you're right. In reputed Galleries, today's fine art photographers are effectively competing against giants from the past. What that says, is that we still can learn from those past artists. Newcomers tend to observe the ongoing trend and try to develop their talent from that starting point. They partly ignore the artistic movements that brought about famed and talented photographers.
For my part, I have two distinct digital photography collections. One with recent artists and another of images from the 19th century onward. I have found out that I feel more inspired by photographs within my older collection. That is not to say that there are not great artists today, far from that, but few stand the test of time (as it probably was in the past).
And thanks to you Ted, we look back at those giants that inspired past and new generations.
I can't wait for your next podcast on "High End of Art Market". My guess is that your quote "Less adventurous taste" will take all its meaning (on the buyer's side) and that we will hear about "gambling stocks".
Hi Ted . I have enjoyed your show for some time now , as an amateur photographer , well that is kindo easy to do , turning pro at 55 years old , well I really know where you are coming from in this episode . For my part returning home to my wee Village in Scotland I find myself making photographs to touch the emotions of people who have lived here all there lives and visitors with local landscape in a way which I know is not "art", but means something to folks , scenes they have lived in yet never seen the way I photograph them just by putting in effort , but let us define "art" , art is communication , it is communicating more in a very special and subjective voice , that being said , I have no desire to make huge amounts of money so I can return to the principles I had as an amateur and wish to do both ends of the spectrum in this episode . For influence on the work I wish to do from my own heart I look to Jozef Sudec , such emotional photographs , raw on the basics of live with wonderful use of light and shadow. Whatever I do it will be for love the of it , for people, and the work I do to my taste from my heart will be for art .
I really appreciate these videos on the business of photography. I am at a place where I see I can make money doing high volume portraits, but my hear is more in creating more artistic environmental portraits and still lifes for people with passionate hobbies.
Very interesting topic. I learned about Gursky’s Rhein II in a photography salon I attended recently. Seeing it sparked my curiosity to learn more about why it was so attractive for the buyer to pay so much. I have heard others say the same with Dutch painters. What you say makes sense.
I recently watched a documentary on Sally Mann who is now linked to the Gagosian mega gallery
You seem very preoccupied about not creating illusions. This duty is now fulfilled. Nevertheless the questions are about how to make it, not the uncountable ways to fail. Photography in 2015 generates a lot of business. So, a lot of people, you yourself included, actually can make a living out of it. There are more than one legitimate way to make it in that domain. Few can be Kenna or Arbus (probably fewer still want that in the latter case) but many may still want to be affiliated with photography in one role or another. Wouldn't it be nice to turn to success stories now that the horror has been duly laid out ?
Jean Montambeault define "making it" please....
MrKikoboy To achieve the goal related to photography that one has set for oneself. For myself it would be to publish my photography, i.e. the one that meets my criterias, and to sell enough of it to earn a living. I do not expect to become famous but a job as a stock photographer would be awfully nice. I wouldn't mind a few weddings here and there if I become good at it. There are actually wedding photographers that I'd definitely call artists.
Interesting video, very balanced and close to my point of view.
What u said is true of many art forms especially music. Nobody plays instrument anyone. I'm a jazz fan. Especially classic Jazz favorite artist is Coltrane who believed in practice. A curse word to many now..
Great episode (as ever) Ted. This is the realm of photography I am very interested in and currently trying to go down. However I do view it as more of a passion project than part of my career. I had one gallery representation, i've got 2 pieces in a show next month, and a pending application for an Art Fair.....do I expect to sell loads or prints and high value? Nope.... Just knowing that some of work is out there would be enough for me, and anything else would be a bonus :)
Yes. I know one person who travels round "art fairs" selling prints. Kitch (usually overdone HDR) landscapes and animals but some "high art" items. He knows what sells to the "general public". I have several friends who are trying to make it as artists showing work in galleries and coffee shops and elsewhere. I am unclear how much of a success they will be.
Brian Richman Hello Brian,
The "general public" may not be the best place to be judge as a fine art artist but it is where you can make money.
There are many ways to sell your "art" or sell your "soul". I read a recent article this year where one photographer (forgot the name) signed an exclusive contract with IKEA for selling his photographs mounted on canvas. What I define as "decorative art".
I am sure he is making lots of money. And my guess is that he can still be creative within the limited expectations of the general public.
I don't generally sell my art, but I know many do sell a product as a way to pay the bills, not really selling their souls, just being pragmatic. Decorative is certainly what the general public like, and as I imply, often quite vomit inducing.
Brian Richman You're quite right when you say that they are just being pragmatic else they would probably starving. It's not really about selling your soul but surviving. When commenting, we sometime like to project what the ideal world could be and forget the harsh realities. And I was being gentle when talking about decorative art, it seems you pick up on that.
So would you say this is on the same level as stock photography?
For obvious reasons, art has always been a vehicle for money laundering. You touched on that some what. The part that confuses me is where trustees or board members buy a piece of art and then donate it to the museum. A case in my area is that the museum has artists donate their work for an auction. This donation is free, but the auction raises tens of thousands of dollars. People purchase the art and then donate it to the museum's collection, for free? This always seems to happen around the end of the year and I suspect it's some type of tax write off. Do you have any information on that? A lot of this stuff is pretty shady imho and it's really annoying when the artists are left with nothing.
John Mason There's 2 possibilities. First is a tax write-off and a hand in the museum for donors. Auctions are different - they ask the artists to donate the work for either charity or museum fundraising. Younger artists will do anything to be associated with the artists the museum already has a relationship with.
The second is a "bequest" or essentially a promise that the art will go there one day. Bequests are loans with promised gifts. They're not very solid and can be taken away - again because the market is not regulated.
As for the laundering - I've heard collectors say that if the government stepped in the entire market would collapse. More than just a bubble under there ;-)
The Art of Photography Weird, this ended up on the wrong video. Thanks Google :(
Hi Ted. Remaining in the fine art world, i'd like to know your opinion on digital art photography. Not just retouching, but actually altering the image (i.e adding elements not present in the shot). Bottom line: to you where's the threshold between the purity of the photographic work and the need to alter the image in order to tell a visual story or transmit a feeling? Thank you. Alberto.
Ted... I get what you're saying about kitsch galleries. I live in Palm Springs, and we certainly have a couple of those here in my city. However... I think you might've been a bit unfair in comparing Peter Lik to the likes of Thomas Kinkade. Lik, at least, has some artistic validity and has some shots that are not what I would call "groundbreaking", but are certainly respectable. Kinkade, on the other hand... is nothing less than the Anti-Christ of the art world. His brush never touched canvas without creating something insipid.
Berus7777 I had never heard of Thomas Kinkade so I looked him up... I wish I hadn't !
Now this is an interesting topic...
I'm an art student in Switzerland, studying contemporary art. My work has naturally turned to the photographic medium, I'm shooting with a Mamiya RB67 and a Rolleicord, you can check it out here if you're interested: vxphotography.tumblr.com/
The school itself (its teachers) can't or won't teach us about the art world, the galleries, who to talk to, where to go or what to do to get started, how to survive as an artist. Or anything else really... it's just a place where you get more or less relevant critique and a Bachelors degree if you're lucky.
Would you do an episode for aspiring artist on how to get started?
Thanks again for all the shows!
Vx
Ted, what are your thoughts about artist cooperatives?
Thanks❤
Thanks buddy. Good video
absolutely love this video
love you videos