Topic: new uk based gallery for film 'fine art' photography

[DonkeyDave]

I met up with these guys at the weekend, nice bunch based in Lewes which is sort of my home town. What is exciting is though they are purely interested in work from west coast photographers they sell almost exclusively silver and platinum images. USA based FW's are probably thinking 'so what' these galleries are ten a penny in Carmel/Sedona etc but in the UK the 'fine art' photography base is almost all images of 60s fashion/music/stars, there is no real gallery base for this sort of work.
Even better, I've got an invite to see some of John Sextons work in the New Year, and the platinum 8x10 contact prints I've seen were incredible.

www.redwoodgallery.co.uk

[Andrej K]

Thanks for the link.. Sadly, it's still far from here, but one thing I've found interesting and that's the pricing of emerging photographer's work - something I have been thinking about a lot these days. Seems that I wasn't so far off in my thoughts judging on their prices.

[DonkeyDave]

the prices are similar to what I charge too, they had some of John Sexton's work at almost bargain basement prices - I'm never going to be a millionaire selling prints....

[Late Developer]

.....if only I could produce something people would consider buying!! 

I went to see a gallery in the wilds of Suffolk (Thornham Magna) run by "Beyond the Image" group.  The 7 members hold regular exhibitions of theirwork - which is mostly very good, IMO.  They also allow guests to rent a wall at £100 per month - which I didn't think was too expensive. However, the only downside I can see is that it's a bit out of the way, in a converted estate building in a village just off the A140 near a place called "Eye".

I'll have to have a look-see at the Redwood place as I'd love to produce something of that standard instead of my "snaps".

[zapsnaps]

I think their prices are too cheap for 'emerging' talent, at c£70!

I don't have a darkroom, so I need a commercial print lab. OK, I choose to use Metro and they are regarded as expensive, but of excellent quality - they make most of the prints you see at London exhibitions. Their top service for a similar sized print is £32 plus VAT. Assuming that I'm VAT registered and can reclaim the VAT and assuming that the gallery splits the sale 50/50 with the photographer, that leaves me a 'profit' of £3. Out of which I need to pay the postage from me to the lab, the lab back to me for me to check, the postage from me to the gallery.

This essentially means that a) my time is worthless, b) there is no inherent intrinsic value in my artistic vision or creation and that c) I can live on fresh air, get my utility bills gifted as artistic support and find a mortgage company who has no interest in having their loan repaid.

And no, I don't know what the answer is - I'm merely saying that the margin on a commercially printed photo retailed at £70 is, for me, as close to zero as makes no difference.

Possible answers?

We sell prints ( or give them away) for free in the hope that we'll get noticed and increase our prices. That usually means changing galleries, to change the price markedly. It's difficult enough for most of us to get a single gallery to take our work, let alone trade up to a better one with a better address and swankier openings.

The gallery decreases their margin - always a perennial moan, but out of their £35 margin, they pay VAT on the full price (£14), have premises and staff to pay for etc, and risk having the picture go 'stale' before they can move it on to a punter.

Or we could sell the print for more at the existing gallery. But even increasing the price to £100 doesn't make it an attractive proposition if I still pay £32 of my £50 to the printer. And galleries will tell you that at my level, the higher the price, the more the resistance from the buyer.

My personal feeling is I don't try and sell because I can't get the numbers to work for me. Yes, I could go to a lesser printer or use Metro's standard service and pay 'just ' £15-20 for a print that is only half as good. But add in the postage and we are still dangerously close to 35 quid.

I have an artist chum who paints in oils and exhibits regularly at local events. His aim is to get punters to pay the cost of materials. His time is not compensated and he has no expectation of ever being recognised. He just needs the house room as he can't keep them all. I'm lucky enough to be able to keep almost 25 years of negs and slides in two filing cabinets.

Please feel free to shout at me if I'm an old grumpy snapper, or if you have a model that works and wish to share it with me.

Lastly, well done and good luck to any FW who actually does sell consistently and at a realistic margin. Hats off and spread the joy of real film and real prints to the world.

[gsgary]

I think their prices are too cheap for 'emerging' talent, at c£70!

I don't have a darkroom, so I need a commercial print lab. OK, I choose to use Metro and they are regarded as expensive, but of excellent quality - they make most of the prints you see at London exhibitions. Their top service for a similar sized print is £32 plus VAT. Assuming that I'm VAT registered and can reclaim the VAT and assuming that the gallery splits the sale 50/50 with the photographer, that leaves me a 'profit' of £3. Out of which I need to pay the postage from me to the lab, the lab back to me for me to check, the postage from me to the gallery.

This essentially means that a) my time is worthless, b) there is no inherent intrinsic value in my artistic vision or creation and that c) I can live on fresh air, get my utility bills gifted as artistic support and find a mortgage company who has no interest in having their loan repaid.

And no, I don't know what the answer is - I'm merely saying that the margin on a commercially printed photo retailed at £70 is, for me, as close to zero as makes no difference.

Possible answers?

We sell prints ( or give them away) for free in the hope that we'll get noticed and increase our prices. That usually means changing galleries, to change the price markedly. It's difficult enough for most of us to get a single gallery to take our work, let alone trade up to a better one with a better address and swankier openings.

The gallery decreases their margin - always a perennial moan, but out of their £35 margin, they pay VAT on the full price (£14), have premises and staff to pay for etc, and risk having the picture go 'stale' before they can move it on to a punter.

Or we could sell the print for more at the existing gallery. But even increasing the price to £100 doesn't make it an attractive proposition if I still pay £32 of my £50 to the printer. And galleries will tell you that at my level, the higher the price, the more the resistance from the buyer.

My personal feeling is I don't try and sell because I can't get the numbers to work for me. Yes, I could go to a lesser printer or use Metro's standard service and pay 'just ' £15-20 for a print that is only half as good. But add in the postage and we are still dangerously close to 35 quid.

I have an artist chum who paints in oils and exhibits regularly at local events. His aim is to get punters to pay the cost of materials. His time is not compensated and he has no expectation of ever being recognised. He just needs the house room as he can't keep them all. I'm lucky enough to be able to keep almost 25 years of negs and slides in two filing cabinets.

Please feel free to shout at me if I'm an old grumpy snapper, or if you have a model that works and wish to share it with me.

Lastly, well done and good luck to any FW who actually does sell consistently and at a realistic margin. Hats off and spread the joy of real film and real prints to the world.

For not much more you could get a wet print by Robin Bell, printer to Terry o'Neil just to name one

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

[DonkeyDave]

as we are talking about galleries and margins and selling prints...

Personally, and it may well not apply to anyone else, the best 'epiphany' I have had is that I will never make decent/any money from photography. I am an 'amateur' in the original sense, I have a love or passion for the subject. Once you accept that, you start to take images for personal reasons, rather than taking images that people might like to buy. I stress this works for me and maybe not for you.
I do sell images, I pay £10 a month to belong to a local arts council funded gallery, I put on a new show at least twice a year - really only to stretch me, learn new printing techniques. I very very rarely sell work through the gallery, most is from word of mouth or people who get my website address and then maybe approach me directly years later. This small turn over usually covers the raw materials of printing/film/chemicals. It goes no way towards my time, but that is for my own personal satisfaction and development.
Maybe one day I will be 'found' but its as likely as me winning the X factor, so I don't let it bother me, I just have fun with my photography - it's for me.
So I don't feel you are grumpy Zapsnaps, I've been there. I've sold prints at cost, run around getting them framed. Its not fun, now I charge for my time and printing costs, and if they want to pay they will, if not they won't, and mostly they won't, I don't take it personally.
The gallery model itself is probably not sustainable, almost all my sales have been over the web. Small shows get you out there and may get you some business years from now. These guys I mentioned are web based, and then rent gallery time for promotions. I get the impression they do this for love rather than money, they have 'proper' jobs.
In the UK I feel that photography is not viewed as an art, or worth as much. I enlarged an image to 30 inches x 30 inches, got it framed and delivered and hung it in this ladies house myself. She was very grateful as it had saved her 'the bother of taking the picture myself'. Photography is that easy isn't it, just point and shoot.

[Late Developer]

Solid case, well made, Mr Zapsnaps.

I wonder whether there's an opportunity for less well-established photographers to move the production to the point of sale, even with more recognised galleries? So long as the gallery agrees to source prints of a quality acceptable to the photographer and the punter, the photographer would, effectively, license the photo - maybe with a maximum production run or with a link to taking a share in the gallery profits in the event that sales exceed X units.....  That way, at least there's less up-front cost for the photographer.

At the other end of the scale, if you go to Chris Beetles photo gallery just off Piccadilly in London (one of the few I've visited), you'll see prints by very established photographers.  One A2-ish sized print by Steve McCurry was going for over £30k (and no it wasn't a photo of the Afghan Girl).  The majority of smaller and lesser-known prints were on sale for around £10k and the gallery said it was doing brisk business. Greatphotographer, great photos but only available to the super-rich.

For my own amusement, I had 4 photos I took on safari in Kenya a few years ago (digi-snaps or I'd post them to prove the point) printed, mounted and framed. They're on my living room wall as we speak.  They cost about £83 each - and that wasn't full price as the guy who runs the photo shop that did the work is a mate of mine and gave me a decent discount.

Whether anyone would buy a copy of them is a different issue but they are, I feel, reasonably commercial.  It's just that no-one's ever heard of me as a photographer and they could probably get a commercially-produced print by (insert name of well-known wildlife photographer here) for the same sort of money.

Oh well, I don't think I'll be choosing to make a career change anytime soon if I'm to keep my wife and cats in the style to which they have become accustomed.......

[Andrej K]

I don't know whether I should feel sorry for stirring up this debate...

I for myself was certainly not concerned about galleries or margins of profit or any such thing.. only about the price for the end-customer.

I only sell a print or two from time to time - and most of it to friends (of my friends) or to people who get interested in my work through internet forums. And being an amateur as Dave has explained I just want to share this amateurism (read: love for photography or for the photographed subject) with others (and not to be out of my pocket doing that).

[zapsnaps]

gsgary - I did have Robin Bell produce a lith print for me. It was FANTASTIC! (the print - not the snap). It was such a good print that the quality of print is often mentioned at portfolio reviews - anybody remember those? Slight problem. My 'assistant' (read Mrs Zapsnaps) had a frame made to fit the print in advance, and a mount made to size. She nailed them all together at Robin's studio with his kind assistant helping. Mrs Z then wrapped the package securely and took it to straight to the (cough) Royal Academy for exhibition, where the finished 'artwork' was handed to the porter.

I got back to ZapTowers and asked what the print was like. Mrs Z said that it 'looked nice' (a tech description, often used by assistants) and showed me the trial print Robin made and gave to me at no cost. Even the trial print looked fantastic to me - I couldn't wait to see the proper one.

I asked Mrs Z where the neg was. She taped it to the packaging 'so it wouldn't get lost' and threw it away at the RA.

It's about the only time I wished I'd taken a shot digitally.

Guys - I agree about being an amateur in the good sense of the word. And if anybody asks me for a print, they may have it at cost. But that's for people I know or have a relationship with. If a punter walks into a gallery, I think I am entitled to make a profit from the punter, just as the film maker did, the paper maker, the printer, mount manufacturer and the framer. Why am I/we the only variable in the chain who works for free?

[Paul Mitchell]

I often get asked "would you like to make a living from photography?" Even before those words have left their mouth I say "God no!" I go on to explain that if I were under the same pressures making images as I were with my full time job as a graphic designer I'd fall out of love with it in a thrice! Don't get me wrong I love what I do as a job but it is just that 'a job' which pays the mortgage etc. Photography is my hobby and as such a release from being tied to a computer screen all day. I often equate photography to fishing... I could sit by the side of a river all day and not catch a thing, but return having enjoyed the fresh air, absorbing the sights, sounds and smells of the outdoors. I've often been out all day and not exposed a frame.

I've had mediocre success with selling work, not once have I ever broken even though. This summer I was fortunate to exhibit with nearly 30 other distinguished photographers in the heart of London with approximately 200 images on display, less than 10 images were sold!

I totally agree with Dave "make images for personal reasons, not with a view to selling". If and when someone likes your work enough to have it hanging on their wall it's an added bonus. I sometimes get more pleasure giving images as gifts than for profit.

Paul

[Late Developer]

You're absolutely right, of course, Paul.  However, I did make a few bob shooting weddings in the halcyon days of the early 1980s when not everyone owned a DSLR and was "a photographer".

It would just be nice to, occasionally, sell the odd print and cover the cost of the last / next acquisition.  That said, concentrating on improving my skills would probably bear more fruit....

[Verian]

I've sold more Poetry than I have photographs, and Poetry is a VERY hard sell! I think that there is a sense nowadays that if it is viewable on the internet then it should be free, this is entirely wrong of course, but it is just how things seem to be now. The majority of people are not after an outstanding print (quality) either, most would be happy with something uploaded and printed online. I spoke to a professional photographer the other day, he does mostly weddings using a high end Canon digital, sold all his film equipment as people weren't prepared to pay for it, they expect 500 images on a disc to do with as they please, I know he used to make some extra income from putting together albums for customers, but that's tailed off, people will buy their own album and get his images printed themselves, this has resulted in him having to change his pricing structure as there are little or no 'extras', no framed enlargements for over the fireplace, no prints for family and friends, that sort of thing.

I've probably strayed off topic a bit there, sorry. The point I was trying to get to was that, from what I've seen, being a Proffesional photographer as a job, actually sucks!

[KevinAllan]

This thread has been a really interesting read. My experience of selling images has been very modest - three stock images sold, two prints. From where I sit, Paul Mitchell (for example) is a relatively established photographer, so if he can't make any money out of it then there is now way I will. 

I feel that wanting to make money out of your photography is a phase that many photographers go through, but once you've given up on the idea, it is quite liberating. I continue to contribute some stock images to Getty and Alamy, but they are images I took for myself so there was no initial outlay, and whilst I only get a small percentage when they sell,  it hasn't cost me anything either. The same is true that images I have for sale through Redbubble - if any sell (they haven't yet) then Redbubble do the printing, framing, and delivery with no upfront expenditure from me.

[DonkeyDave]

Liberating is a good word, I'd hate to be doing this for money, my family would be very hungry for one, the other - it's fun, its my time, my world. That would change with doing it for money.
Most artists make money when they are dead.

[gsgary]

gsgary - I did have Robin Bell produce a lith print for me. It was FANTASTIC! (the print - not the snap). It was such a good print that the quality of print is often mentioned at portfolio reviews - anybody remember those? Slight problem. My 'assistant' (read Mrs Zapsnaps) had a frame made to fit the print in advance, and a mount made to size. She nailed them all together at Robin's studio with his kind assistant helping. Mrs Z then wrapped the package securely and took it to straight to the (cough) Royal Academy for exhibition, where the finished 'artwork' was handed to the porter.

I got back to ZapTowers and asked what the print was like. Mrs Z said that it 'looked nice' (a tech description, often used by assistants) and showed me the trial print Robin made and gave to me at no cost. Even the trial print looked fantastic to me - I couldn't wait to see the proper one.

I asked Mrs Z where the neg was. She taped it to the packaging 'so it wouldn't get lost' and threw it away at the RA.

It's about the only time I wished I'd taken a shot digitally.

Guys - I agree about being an amateur in the good sense of the word. And if anybody asks me for a print, they may have it at cost. But that's for people I know or have a relationship with. If a punter walks into a gallery, I think I am entitled to make a profit from the punter, just as the film maker did, the paper maker, the printer, mount manufacturer and the framer. Why am I/we the only variable in the chain who works for free?

I'm going to get him to do a print when i have one that i love i think it is well worth the money, but as soon as my son totally moves out ( comes back every other weekend from the army) his room is going to be a darkroom but i might try Metro for a few prints

[KevinAllan]

Too late after making my first post, I thought of this slogan:

Photography is for feeding the soul ... not for feeding the family !

[zapsnaps]

KEVIN - Great slogan - I agree!

[Andrej K]

Photography is for feeding the soul ... not for feeding the family !

You are absolutely right!

Now make a cool poster with it and start selling it! 

[zapsnaps]

Andrej - great idea! Bit of artwork and print them for £2 a go and retail them for £20. Or special Xmas offer - £19.99 each or two for £40. I think that's called marketing.

There have been some interesting comments made about personal enjoyment, self satisfaction etc all well made and all of which I am in agreement. But the thread has swerved a little. What do we think about a gallery selling prints for £70 and how can we - hypothetically if needs be - produce first rate prints to be sold at £70 retail?

Or to broaden the discussion - is selling original quality prints a sustainable model (for the photographer - not the earth) at £70 retail? And how do we compete with a quality neg scanned at hi-res, printed on a reasonable A3 home printed on nice paper at a cost of perhaps £3 which can be sold by students in street markets for £10 or £15, when I believe that few purchasers would be able to discern the difference between a hi-kwality digi home print and a Robin Bell original.

[LT]

interesting Dave. Looks like I need to get to Lewes in the new year for a looksee. fancy meeting up for a coffee sometime?

[gsgary]

I used to shoot action shots of dogs at agility shows and print on site with a dye sub printer for a lady that walks are dogs, one day she saw my studio shots and said why not set up a studio at the next show, i took £350 in 6 hours only charging £10 for a mounted 8x6 print and mount cost me £0.80
But i know a photographer that sold prints for around £80 didnt sell many so he put them up to £150 and trebbled his sales

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

[DonkeyDave]

There aren't many that are £70, the platinum images (10x8s) were £185, which is a little more than I charge. The £70 silver prints I saw were 'ok'. However I agree that artist has almost certainly made a loss, consider the cost of film, chemicals, time and effort - and then shipping to the uk, I doubt anyone is making any money, the gallery certainly can't be making much...I imagine it's a labour of love.
As to your comments re print quality, under glass I really struggled to pick the digital print from the platinum, in the end guessing right as the digital print quality was 'better'. Where better means more perfect, with better microdetail and contrast from the smoother paper. I preferred the slight grittyness and dirty tone of the platinum. The man on the street would have no chance telling them apart.

[DonkeyDave]

Leon the gallery is 'virtual', with them hiring out venues to do regular shows. A permanent gallery is unlikely to be able to pay its way, unless its surrounded by rich customers. Not sure how the Lucy Bell gallery manages to exist in Hastings, I'm guessing it relies a lot on the Terry O'Neil back catalogue.

But I'm up for a coffee anytime.

[LT]

oooops! didnt see that. But, yes, a trip to east sussex is always good for me. We'll have to sort somthing out. I'm working in Hove at Mill View hosp all day on the 2nd ... but I doubt I'd get time to pop out, unless you fancy a late afternoon/ early evening coffee or pub drink? Other FWs are welcome too of course.

[DonkeyDave]

I'm on holiday that week (which involves staying at home) so can do the 2nd - what ever suits you

[Late Developer]

I've carried over a couple of days holiday into 2014 and have 2nd and 3rd off.  Therefore, if there's a meet up in the offing, please count Lara (if she hasn't found a job yet) and (definitely) myself in.

[DonkeyDave]

having said all that...

just got a commission for a 20 inch platinum print...

nice  :-)

[gothamtomato]

Do you have art or craft festivals over there in the UK? If so, that's a great place to start selling your work. I did it for years and was doing well at it until the economy tanked in 2008. That's why I now have a day job producing photography workshops. But I still do festivals on the side and actually do better at them now because I don't have the pressure of them being my primary source of income.

[Late Developer]

Do you have art or craft festivals over there in the UK? If so, that's a great place to start selling your work. I did it for years and was doing well at it until the economy tanked in 2008. That's why I now have a day job producing photography workshops. But I still do festivals on the side and actually do better at them now because I don't have the pressure of them being my primary source of income.

Hi Deborah. How are you?

Yes, we have arts and crafts fairs.  However, the ones I've seen locally (Essex and other parts of East Anglia) tend to be limited to paintings, pottery, woodturning and basket ware. Photography is in amongst the other art forms occasionally but, over here, it seems to be regarded as a separate art form for some reason.

[stevesegz]

An interesting read, my thoughts the 'Gallery' in a traditional sense is no longer viable, however I believe this is a good thing. The internet has changed the visibility of many 'artists' regardless of speciality including music. The secret I believe is to find a model that works and sell directly. Social media is breeding a new culture of open market and direct sales. Yes you need to become all things as a business but there are flourishing sales opportunities if you get it right. The days of producing a piece of art, taking it to the gallery, and sitting back waiting for the cheque to arrive are long gone.

I did a bit of marketing around an Open studio event that most county councils arrange, minimal cost, good audience, I opened up my studio, a larger double garage, displayed the prints that I had taken, made, matted and framed myself in a way to keep costs small. I had an opening event with food for about 40 invited guests no pressure sales just priced prints hanging to view. I sold 15 prints in total over a 2 week period and made just over £800 profit from the whole venture. it wont earn me a living but it did finance a few bits and bobs and I enjoyed every minute.

In my view however photobooks are the new media of choice for many photography enthusiasts and this too is something that can be an area to explore.

[Francois]

An interesting read, my thoughts the 'Gallery' in a traditional sense is no longer viable, however I believe this is a good thing.

But strangely, there's still nothing like walking in a real gallery to see stuff up close.
Nowadays, I'm beginning to feel there's only one way to make this a non money loosing venture and it's to follow a bit in the footsteps of Calgary's now defunct 809 Gallery. http://wreckcityproject.wordpress.com/about-809-gallery/

They didn't close because they ran out of funds... they closed because the city expropriated the land to build condos!

They have a few videos online and I get the feeling that this was a pretty cool place. After seeing this, I just wish I had a separate garage at my place...

[DonkeyDave]

There are lots of different models for selling, I think the best is to get the prints out there. However you do it, if people see them, some will buy them.
My best period of sales was when for 6 months I had an 'art instillation' in the town centre. The local council approached me as the butchers next to Waitrose had gone out of business, and with the recession there were no takers and it was a blot on the highstreet.
I spent 2 days, with my Mum and daughter cleaning the windows and all the metal trays and meat hooks, I can still smell in my mind the rotting fetid smell of month old meat remnants...
We hung images off meat hooks, and my Dad made some easels that we moved around the shop to make a pretty good display, we were allowed access once a month to change the images over, and I just put my email address in the window. Was a good 6 months, until someone broke the shop front window and the council got scared about insurance and liability - so 2 years later, its still empty covered in posters and stickers, shame.

[stevesegz]

A great example of my point Dave, a gallery is a space and the contents within it. wouldn't it be great if all the empty retail properties could facilitate artists to support the arts and actually bring some beauty and reason to visit declining city centres. Creating a cultural centre as opposed to a commercial one.

Oh, hold on and there's the crux, there's minimal profit in that so we will just have to put up with the steel shutters and visual decline. And yet if artists could find a voice it might just increase the public perception and appreciation of art and stimulate a resurgence in the vocation.

 maybe one day.

[gsgary]

I'm exhibition secretary for our club and we get to use a shop front in the local precinct we always loose it coming up to Christmas for a cheap crappy calendar shop but we have it back on the 6th Jan, the last few years we have had great comments and also attracted new members

[Phil Bebbington]

A very interesting thread.

I have to agree with Dave. I shoot for pleasure and expect nothing. I occasionally get enquiries about sales, but, they are usually people who don't want to spend very much  at all. I'm always touched if someone likes a print and takes the trouble to write and ask. I usually send them one for a little more than it costs me - you  know, share the love 

The flip side of that though can be nice if and when it happens. Last year I was contacted by a gallery asking if I might be interested in being part of an exhibition in a new gallery in Texas. They treated  me in a way I could never have  imagined. Everyone connected with the project was a joy to deal with. They printed them for me (16") framed them, paid for me to fly to Texas  for the opening as well as 5 days accommodation. I left them to price them - probably just as well! They set the prices at over $2,000 each and I sold 6.  A wonderful experience that I don't expect to ever happen again, but, it shows that it can happen. How did they find my images? Flickr.

There is no moral to this story other than, if you enjoy taking them for your own pleasure and you get them out there to share with no expectations you will, at best, be surprised and at worst, still love taking photos.

[DonkeyDave]

I'm not surprised Phil I think your States images are awesome - if only that happened every week eh?!

[Phil Bebbington]

Thanks, Dave. I was trying to make the point that the little bit of luck we all need can be just around the corner as long as we make the images available to find. Of course we need to tag the images in the right way too. They were looking for images of a particular place and I had tagged them appropriately.

I guess the gallery had the profile and the access to the clients to which paying that amount of money was normal.

I'm still shooting for me. Giving them away or practically.

Who knows, that next inbox ping could be the big one