Of course, I hope you are right. As we are surrounded with factory made appliances, electronic devices, even furniture that are no longer built to last, people will start to hunger for craftsmanship; something made by a human being and not punched out of a block of plastic 100 at a time. I am thinking that original hand-made items will increase in intrinsic value which will make them more sought over. Once upon a time, every thing in a household was handmade. Now you're lucky to find ANYTHING like that.
thanks for the thoughts.

Lori,

great posting. Have been in technology for more years than I want to admit, I think "chips" were still wood when I started, but one thing is absolutely true. Things change in that business and rapidly. As artists we should try to think how to use some newer ideas BEFORE everyone else has and not wait to just get lost in the crowd.

Thanks for another good one,

Michael

Lori,

Very good comments.

However, there are really two (2) art markets here in the West.

One is the "dink and dunk" market for (a) small paintings, (b) not very good paintings and (c) some terrible "plein air' paintings selling for $250 to $750. This market is collapsing as collectors flee to quality. My galleries no longer want this low-end work as it does not sell in today's economy.

The other is the high end, high wealth collector market (see: Western Art Collector, Art of the West, and Western Art and Architecture magazines).

These markets are typified by shows such as the CM Russell Museum Show, Buffalo Bill Art Show, Prix de West, and the Autry Show, and others. Paintings sell for $5,000 to $250,000 and more.

My works sells for $750 to $2,500 for small works and $5,000 to $15,000 for large pieces. I am working hard to move in to the $25,000 to $50,000 range.

This high end market is still thriving although sales for poor work has crashed and sales for medium quality work has slowed considerably. We are having a very good sales year!

Dave Mayer
West Creek Studio

Twitter and Facebook are not going to sell $5,000 to $50,000 paintings!

Normal gallery sales are a little down for most artists right now, but we've also seen record years for many auctions and major shows. I think Lori's vision about the future role of galleries may be correct.

It seems that we, more than ever, have to avoid complacency in our marketing as much as in our art.

Good luck to us all...I think we should be pretty excited about the future!

Dave,

Good luck breaking through to that top market! Hope you make it.

I'm starting to think that "collectors" at the high end might need to be marketed to and sold to just like you'd sell any other product. Not as a group, but one on one like a real sales job.

Michael

Great article as always Lori!! Food for thought.


Nancy

This could be one of the most important posts todate.

Thanks for the viewpoint of presenting the challenge as an opportunity.

our challenge is looking at this new paradigm honestly.

thx

tom

Lori,
this is another great post of yours. I agree that the times and the technology are changing and the artists have so much more control comparing to years before. This is thrilling that our ideas and concepts can find ways of expression and not always the artist must be dependent on the gallery representation or publishers. From the other end I think those fine galleries, top quality events, magazines promoting the best of the best and the whole art industry is also great and necessary as it pumps up the ambitions and keep everybody busy to get better and better all the time. They keep the standards on the highest levels. It is like talking about abstract art versus representational one. They both do great and make art richer as two existing streams.
I love technology and I like so much the fact that I don't need to get frustrated if a gallery reject my submission since there is so many ways to promote the art by ourselves, get new fans, take care of own sales, get in the shows, increase traffic on the website and so on.
I know though that there are many artists who want to paint and have others to take care of the business. It's great if they can find a representation and focus just on creating the art.
So this is wonderful that today we have opportunities for everybody who decided to follow the artistic calling.
I am the type of a person who likes to take charge of my art business and I love this variety of opportunities. I am excited about the future :)

Wow! Very exciting an encouraging.

Thanks for this, Lori. As a new Old Age Pensioner (starting this month) I will for the first time ever in my life have an income I can depend on! My art has kept me going many times as a commercial illustrator/graphic designer, college instructor, portrait painter, and sales of my paintings in shows and sometimes galleries. It has been uphill all the way. Keeping up with technology and trying to scope out what might be coming down the pipe is harder for us older artists but I have found that keeping true to my inner vision of my art and what I want to do with it has been good over the years. I am blogging and facebooking, twittering, and doing outdoor shows, showing in galleries on a one time basis, and getting my name out there. If I have to keep doing more stuff on computer I won't have time to paint:-)

Karen, good point about spending too much time online and not having time to paint. By all means... painting must come first. Otherwise, we haven't got anything to bring to the market, eh?

Theresa, your caveman art marketing scheme made me LOL. Thanks for that.

Thanks Esther for sharing your experience... plus the good points about online marketing combined with shows and competitions. In fact, that's a huge point. We have to market ourselves through other means in order to get ppl to come to our website.

Esther, thanks so much for contributing to discussions here. Your advice and experience has been helpful, I'm sure to others.

That's not to slight anyone else who's contributed, I just wanted to give Esther a "thumbs up" while I'm online.

Many have mentioned David's post so I went back to read it again. Here are my thoughts.

I paint along side of Richard Schmid, Nancy Guzik, Clayton Beck, and sometimes Jeremy Lipking and his friends. Richard's the only one of us that sells for $250,000, and Jeremy probably has the next highest prices. My dear friend, Kathy Anderson's paintings are selling like crazy through galleries, AND her prices have risen very well in the last 5 years. My former student, Kyle Stuckey has quadrupled his prices in the last 3 years by working with galleries - now with Legacy Gallery.

Several collectors whom I call my friends, buy the really expensive stuff, and I also have friends who buy less expensive paintings.(sometimes mine). I agree with David, that one's work has to be competitive and excellent in order to sell in the highest priced markets.

On the other hand, I know many, many artists who are not nationally known, nor would be considered masters, but they make a pretty decent living selling their paintings at outdoor shows, regional galleries, and from their websites. Many sell through all three of these venues. Some have made over $100K/year for over a decade.

I see more and more regionally known artists making an income from art than ever before. While their quality may not be at the level of a Schmid, Guzik or Lipking... etc... I'm happy for them.

I'm in that lower range myself, and that's where I prefer to be. I strive to be the best painter I can be, and my work has been published in magazines dozens of times... although mostly Watercolor Magazine.

Richard had said to us Putney Painters that he never wanted to try to sell his work for a million dollars like another artist does. He stated, "I only have a handful of collectors at my current price range, if I were to raise prices significantly, these collectors could no longer afford my work." He went on to say that while we (Putneys) would need to paint a greater number of paintings to make a living, at least we are in a price range where a lot of folks can afford our work.

Calvin Goodman's Art Marketing Handbook describes the different levels of collectors and where they buy art. BTW: Clint and I are mentioned in that book ;-) I wrote the chapter on artists' web sites. Everything I wrote is out of date and no longer true - that's what got me thinking about writing this post.

Thanks David for your contributions. Your ideas make sense, and I understand that market. It's changing too... I know this from my conversations with gallery directors who run major galleries - some out West, some in the East.

OK... I've got to get offline now - errands to run, promises to keep.
Lori

Dave, I regularly look at and study all the collectors' magazines you mention, and I can't help but wonder if there's a little bit of the 'chicken or the egg' thing going on. How is anyone determining 'quality?' It's quality if the magazines feature it, or the magazines feature it because it's quality? I'm not convinced it is entirely on the independent merits of the art, as I see a lot of popular, pricey schlock, mixed in with the truly outstanding work in these magazines, auctions, etc.

Lori, thank-you so much! I have wanted to meet all those you mention. It will be a pleasure to just be in the ballroom soaking up that energy.
On the other topic of the prices artists receive for their paintings, it is a very lucrative business. We all have an opportunity to become a wealthy artist as long as we follow a positive path upwards. Lucky for us artists, the older we become the more valuable our art becomes. That is as long as we keep receiving accolades and paint what appeals to the collectors.
I am writing up and sending out a new e-newsletter, so I best get to finishing it. There is your best marketing, thanks to FASO for giving me this opportunity!

Lori, you are right on all counts. I'm feeling it, too! I don't want to be in a gallery's "stable" but feel I would like to sell my work through many venues. I am going to pursue galleries, but more on my terms and hopefully satisfy myself as well as them. I'm hoping it will be more of a give and give verses a take and take so that we both benefit. I know some galleries don't "get it" yet, but it won't be long until they will or get left behind.

Thanks David for taking the time to type in the names and prices. You mentioned some of my very favorites... Richard isn't one of them.

I'm attracted to representational landscape painters: Clyde Aspevig, Dennis Doheny, Tucker Smith (have his book). Bill Anton and Tim Cox are wonderful artists. Of course, I can't afford any of these artists' paintings.

I have in my collection: Kevin MacPherson, Mike Malm, Nancy Guzik (yes I paid full price), Ralph Oberg, George Strickland, and Dennis Sheehan (he gave me a painting).

Other artists I have collected: John Potter, Rosemary Ladd, Monique Sakellarios, Kyle Stuckey, Dianne Nichols.

We bought most of our collection before 2005. Since, most every artist (except the local ones) now have prices higher than our limit. Nancy's was the highest priced. Richard has painted over one of my watercolors and signed it, but it was sort of a little joke. Still I'm hanging onto it!

Not trying to one up you here David. Just thought you'd like to know which artists I admire, and which ones I can afford.

I'm at the Settler's West miniature show every February. If you're there next time, we can chat if you like.

As a faily new artist, all I can say is I hope you are right about galleries beco ming more successful in the future. I'm trying to improbe my skills more before I apporach anyone though.

Heh-heh, Lori--because of grad school it's in my bones now and I can't get it out! In general, I suspect that you are right that the 'middle man' is going to be a vanishing species, as we already see happening in the businesses you've mentioned. I think in this upcoming new environment artists can form mutually beneficial coalitions, independently of galleries, for various purposes, so I think that will be a really good thing. Have a good trip to Maine!

I would like to expound on the tangent that David brought up about pricing. I have been to several shows out west recently. The lower priced artists (who have good quality) are selling really well. There is a group of collectors who are testing their feet in the waters. They have limited budgets or else are being cautious.

Yes, the high dollar artists do well among the deep pocket collectors. I think the middle range artists are the ones who are hurting the most right now (in general, there are exceptions). The mid range artists are too expensive for the beginning and cautious collectors, but don't have the recognition (and often quality) to attract the serious, deep pocketed collectors.

At least that is my perception.

As for Lori's original theme, there is much truth to it. I look forward to the times!

Keith

Thank you Lori for an interesting and uplifting article, and to everyone who is part of this conversation. I am in a learning curve of finding my niche in the current art world, which has changed dramatically from my entry in the 70s. One of the most important aspects for me is to keep it fun, since art is an aspect of joy in life for me.

Hi Kim,
Very interesting...I am reminded of a gift we gave my parents one Christmas...a photo frame loaded with family photos that runs through a slide show of the photos. They obviously love the gift...but it in no way stands in for actually seeing their children! Truly, there is no substitute for standing in the presence of the actual piece of art, imbued with the flow of creative intelligence through the artist.

Lori,
I have been painting for many years and only within the last couple of years or so have decided to go public with my artwork.
I have since become friends with a few gallery owners. I see what drives them. They all have agendas that may confuse the artist. There is no standard for which galleries/dealers and artist coexists.
I would say that most galleries have a very small collector base so we are taking about the higher end galleries here.
I would like to see all galleries become more successful. That trend would most certainly be better for some artist (which one's no one knows).
The competition is robust and for most artist life will become even more confusing.
As an artist there are so many marketing possibilities. You're like a kid in a candy store it's hard to make up your mind, to find that nitch. Your share of the market that is.

Hi John,

While it may be true that those who aren't interested in original art may eventually hand a digital collection on the wall, I think there will always be a market for original work. The digital screens displaying artwork will impact prints long before original art. The print market is different than the market for original work, and virtual art plays more into that market in my opinion.

Original art has always been for the minority. But that minority knows the value of original art. That minority is willing to pay for it. If it is true that only 5 percent are interested in art, that still translates into about 15,500,000 people in the U.S., not to mention the millions of additional people throughout the world. While I don't know for certain (I have never seen figures), logic would indicate that 5 percent is relatively high compared to the number throughout history. We live in a time when more people have access and want art than previous centuries. It is a great time to be an artist.

I completely agree that we should do more to improve and encourage art in school. But, I just don't buy into the argument that there will be no place for original art in the future. There will always be people who want the rare, one of a kind, original, hand made, art that speaks to them in ways a digital image or print never can.

Lori, what an inspiring challenge to each of us to educate our communities!

Original art will always have a place; those who understand how much it enriches their lives (and how superior it is to prints) find that they MUST collect it!

Great article Lori and lots of very interesting comments to read and digest.

Love what you wrote Lori and I too, have been wondering how our future looks with all of this new technology.

How about thinking of the "artist - gallery" relationship as more of a Partnership? To expand on your idea of artist events in the gallery, how about the gallery inviting people to artist studios (were possible)? Posting short 2-3 minute videos of their artists in the gallery? I think the word "relationship" needs to be expanded to more of a partnership and/or collaboration. Your thoughts?

Great thoughts Lori. We've always got to be looking to adapt to our changing future. One of my greatest difficulties you mention right off the bat.....reading. I find it so difficult to make time, notice I didn't say "find" time, to read.

I wonder if others struggle with this. I know it is key to growth, but something has to give.