Stephen Harrison (SH@stephenharrison.com)
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 22:19:14 -0700
>Sam Wang wrote:
>> there IS a general market ballpark figure for every kind of prints
Katharine Thayer resonds:
>If that's so, why not post a list of those ballpark figures? I'm sure
>that would be helpful to the original questioner, as well as to a lot of
>other folks.
>
Sam Wang writes:
>>- price, unfortunately, also decides the amount of viewer enjoyment:
> "wouldn't you rather look at a print you know is worth lots
>>>of $$$?
Katharine Thayer responds:
>
>I'm sorry, I don't agree with that at all. .... I'd rather sell to people
>who buy art because it means something to them regardless of price.
I understand this point of view but I must secretly admit that if I were to
spend a large amount of money on an image, I would like my investment
somewhat preserved. I would like to believe if things got tight and
financial push came to financial shove that I could sell it and recover at
least part of my investment for self preservation. Such a decision requiers
some judgement and discretion which all of us probably apply to one extent
or another when we buy photographs. There are exceptions to this of course
and six months ago I purchased an expensive image from a totally unknown
photographer for its sheer beauty. But that is an exception for me and I
prefer it to remain an exception. In terms of selling my own images, I
personally have spent an incredible amount of time, energy and income on my
education and experience in photography. It seems that it is reasonable to
charge a usual and customary rate based on prevailing figures of value for
this experience in the creation of photographic images. The ball park
figures are not well defined of course and thus will never be posted. But
they exist. See any gallery.
Stephen Harrison
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:40:36