Is it possible to sell your original artwork (or prints) too soon?
August 8, 2016 2:29 AM Subscribe
As a new artist, it possible to sell your artwork (original paintings, prints or otherwise) too soon? Alternately, what are the cons of selling artwork very early in an artists career?
Recently, someone mentioned to me that their mom was "denied entry into some smaller art shows because she had already sold some of her work" and I'm curious to know how common situations like that (or other drawbacks to selling work early on in an artists career) may be. Granted, every show will be different and have different requirements, but it doesn't seem to be a prevalent circumstance.
I can't find anything online about such an obstacle, or any general recommendation on informational sites against trying to sell some of your early work, but are there such downsides to offering your early pieces? If so, are there any workarounds, such as charging only for materials, not signing the early pieces, etc?
Recently, someone mentioned to me that their mom was "denied entry into some smaller art shows because she had already sold some of her work" and I'm curious to know how common situations like that (or other drawbacks to selling work early on in an artists career) may be. Granted, every show will be different and have different requirements, but it doesn't seem to be a prevalent circumstance.
I can't find anything online about such an obstacle, or any general recommendation on informational sites against trying to sell some of your early work, but are there such downsides to offering your early pieces? If so, are there any workarounds, such as charging only for materials, not signing the early pieces, etc?
I'm a little confused by your question - are you assuming that the reason behind her being denied entry to the shows was because people thought it was a bad idea for her to have sold early work, so they then decided to exclude her from selling any more for her own good?
The most likely explanation to me would be as jon1270 says, that these shows were being put on to provide a platform to new artists (who hadn't yet sold any work), so she was already too far on in her career to be eligible for them. This kind of thing is quite common in eg. playwriting competitions, where they may be aimed at writers at a very specific stage of their career, so only be open to people with no professional credits, or to people with between one and three professional credits etc.
I guess the question is, who were the artists who were allowed to exhibit? Were they more experienced (which would suggest your assumption is right, though seems a little odd to me) or less experienced (which suggests my/jon1270's reading is right)?
posted by penguin pie at 6:00 AM on August 8, 2016
The most likely explanation to me would be as jon1270 says, that these shows were being put on to provide a platform to new artists (who hadn't yet sold any work), so she was already too far on in her career to be eligible for them. This kind of thing is quite common in eg. playwriting competitions, where they may be aimed at writers at a very specific stage of their career, so only be open to people with no professional credits, or to people with between one and three professional credits etc.
I guess the question is, who were the artists who were allowed to exhibit? Were they more experienced (which would suggest your assumption is right, though seems a little odd to me) or less experienced (which suggests my/jon1270's reading is right)?
posted by penguin pie at 6:00 AM on August 8, 2016
Best answer: There are a couple things this could be.
1) The show is restricted to new/emerging artists and that is defined by no sales. The former part (shows restricted to new/emerging artists) is relatively common in my experience. The latter part (defined by no sales) is a very unusual method of determining the former, but it isn't inconceivable. This is what the above answers are guessing, but I think it's more likely to be my second answer below.
2) Many exhibitions require the work in the show to be for sale (at a price point they approve of when they accept your work for exhibition - i.e. you can't list it for a million dollars to avoid the possibility of selling it), so that they have the chance to earn a percentage for the gallery hosting the exhibition by selling it during the exhibition. So I typically can't sell my work to Tom and then borrow it back to exhibit it by listing it as NFS (not for sale). I think this is probably what was going on. I'm a professional artist and I'd say about 70% of the shows I participate in require sellability.
The main con of selling early work as defined by work completed early in the artist's career (as opposed to selling work immediately - even late career work - and then not being able to exhibit it) is if the artist ends up selling work that is not representative of their core subject matter or skill level and that they regret having associated with their artistic practice. Workarounds in this case aren't helpful. (And most contemporary professional artists already don't visibly sign their artwork, though they often sign the back/underside.)
posted by vegartanipla at 10:48 AM on August 8, 2016
1) The show is restricted to new/emerging artists and that is defined by no sales. The former part (shows restricted to new/emerging artists) is relatively common in my experience. The latter part (defined by no sales) is a very unusual method of determining the former, but it isn't inconceivable. This is what the above answers are guessing, but I think it's more likely to be my second answer below.
2) Many exhibitions require the work in the show to be for sale (at a price point they approve of when they accept your work for exhibition - i.e. you can't list it for a million dollars to avoid the possibility of selling it), so that they have the chance to earn a percentage for the gallery hosting the exhibition by selling it during the exhibition. So I typically can't sell my work to Tom and then borrow it back to exhibit it by listing it as NFS (not for sale). I think this is probably what was going on. I'm a professional artist and I'd say about 70% of the shows I participate in require sellability.
The main con of selling early work as defined by work completed early in the artist's career (as opposed to selling work immediately - even late career work - and then not being able to exhibit it) is if the artist ends up selling work that is not representative of their core subject matter or skill level and that they regret having associated with their artistic practice. Workarounds in this case aren't helpful. (And most contemporary professional artists already don't visibly sign their artwork, though they often sign the back/underside.)
posted by vegartanipla at 10:48 AM on August 8, 2016
« Older How to stay on top of ambient/psybient music?... | Clearing out a late loved one's house Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by jon1270 at 3:52 AM on August 8, 2016 [1 favorite]