Fine Art 'game'

[yeffe]

Maybe my myopia has caught up with me but I haven't found discussions of the fine art gallery and

museum 'game'. That is... getting somewhere...or not...as a fine art photographer.

[johncrosley]

Jeff,

 

The bulk of the membership has little acquaintanceship with 'fine art' photography. I suggest you go out and buy a copy of 'Black and White' magazine or Lensework and similar magazines and read those.

 

We had a wonderful member who shot color, 'street' shots and similar, Skip Hunt, whose portfolio was featured for some time, and whose work was both popular and colorful, but he got upset about the rating system at one time and simply left, much to the dismay of many members.

 

Later he returned, posted a photo, which he said was one of his finest works ever, of a rundown gas station, far outside anything he'd ever posted -- something which fell into the realm, I thought of 'fine art' and it got bad ratings (or so he complained). He simply had switched his emphasis and was unprepared for the reaction.

 

Most of Photo.net (not all) does not understand fine art photography. I suggest you broaden your horizons, and say, look at the web site of Merit Esther Engelke, tanz (dance) photographer of Germany, who simply screams through her photographs that she is an 'ARTIST' and a FINE ART ARTIST' -- an old acquaintance of mine and a former portraitist as well, and also suggest that you join the Museum of Photographic Arts, located in Balboa Park, San Diego and/or peruse their offerings for July weekends, especially Wendy Richmond's July 13-15 seminar offered with 'Grossmont College', and if you can attend, make it a point, as first hand experience will far eclipse anything you can learn on Photo.net (fee $215 for members/$260, nonmembers, for the workshop) She is an exhibitor this fall at the museum which has very good offerings, is well-connected and you might make some good acquaintances -- the museum also is fairly 'traditional' in its offerings, I think with emphasis on B&W/ they prefer to be approached by reps, I believe.

 

Don't look to get a 'Fine Arts' education on Photo.net, though there are some 'fine artists' here -- even some extraordinary ones, especially in the older folders and portfolios from years past, which I urge you to survey under the top-rated folders of all time on the TRP search engine.

 

The 'fine art' -- 'museum' game seems fairly inbred, like the world of ballet, where everybody literally seems to know (or know of) everybody else, no matter where you go in the world, unless I miss my guess, and it's best to learn it first hand, or through a mentor.

 

The way to get a mentor is to make yourself available through actual attendance at school classes under someone who is prominent, attend functions where you can also exhibit and/or to have a rep., I am told.

 

But this is surmise and hearsay; maybe somebody knows better. I know relatively little about this end, and would be delighted to learn more.

 

John (Crosley)

[yeffe]

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I aimed for a career as a photographer with a

teaching sinecure. Alas, the photo-education boom of the 60's - 70's had just peaked

after I attended a year-long grad program with Minor White at MIT. None of my classmates

landed teaching jobs either.

 

I'll gladly discuss the ramifications of the fine art world as it stands today)as much as I

understand it) with anyone who's interested.

[elliot_n]

When Thomas Gardner used to contribute to the Philosophy of Phootgraphy forum (here

on photo.net), there were some interesting and heated discussions about fine art

photography and the art establishment. Sadly that forum seems to have descended into

childish bickering.

 

Here are a couple of blogs that engage with fine art photography. The first one is

particularly intesresting:

 

http://jmcolberg.com/weblog/

 

http://chromogenia.typepad.com/artatlanta/

 

I would like to see a forum on photo.net dedicated to 'art photography'.

[a._christopher_earle]

The reality is that the bulk of photo.net users wouldn't know art from an asteroid. This is more the McDonald's of photography, tastes consistently pretty good, but for the most part pretty safe (note that I do not post photos to photo.net, have in the past under a now forgotten account, but people seemed to be rating boobs, not photographs)...

[RobertChura]

In my opinion, Fine Art Photographers are a social club of elite photographers that label themselves and others to achieve a status to promote their work. Most are in the education/museum field which enable them to pursue their vision without monetary restraint.<P> In other words, you have to hang around them and agree with their policies or you don't get to join the club. It is very exclusive. Their standards are very high and it is possible to attain, but unless you are in the system you won't get reconized. Photographs alone won't get you there. You have to attend their schools and play by their rules.

[mike dixon]

Robert, do have <b>any</b> experience with galleries or museums?<P>

My experience with gallery owners (admittedly in a smaller market like Nashville) is that most are quite friendly and receptive to looking at new work. Just visit galleries in your area, find ones that seem "compatible" with your work, and talk to the owners about taking a look at your work.<P>

There are several books on amazon.com about marketing fine art photography (Jeff Spirer has a recommendation for one with very useful information, but I don't remember the title or author offhand).<P>

The fine art "game" isn't that much different from business in general: if you have solid work, success is largely a matter of hard work, marketing, and networking.

[Spearhead]

<i>Jeff Spirer has a recommendation for one with very useful information, but I don't remember the title or author offhand</i><p>

 

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0811850935/sr=8-2/qid=1149347252/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-1362740-9868133?%5Fencoding=UTF8">Cay Lang, Taking the Leap</a>, haven't read the new edition, I have the older one.

[kelly_flanigan1]

The phrase "fine art photography" is abit overworked. <BR><BR>In the printing business customers use the term "fine art photography" to mean about anything to be displayed.<BR><BR>Thus "fine art photography" just means you customer cares about his or her displayed dog, cat, sunset, soccer, building, sunrise, prom, forest, frog, airshow, group shot, wedding, star/moon, yet another sunset, rainforest, baby photos, cars, yet another sunset, surfing, movie star, yet another sunset, yet another forest of mountain shot.<BR><BR>"Fine art" has also just been a paper type, going back before digital, to the Kodak Fine art, Kodak ELITE Fine-art papers <i> For making fine display prints</i>. (1980's Kodak Catalog) Thus maybe "fine art photography" just means folks are going to display their cat, dog, sunset images to the world, become famous, and retire early. :)<BR><BR>The joke in the printing seminars is the "fine art photography" work is fine fart work, since each customers thinks their own work is good, and others stinks.

[yeffe]

By 'fine art' (a term as icky as can be) I mean the highest reaches of the market: museums,

galleries, books, etc.

 

I have a lifetime of personal work that, when put together, is much more than the sum of

'family snapshots and portraits. One avenue I'm thinking about is a limited edition of

hand-made books of some kind.

 

I don't seek to be the next Friedlander but simply to find an audience for my work.<div></div>

[yeffe]

To those who lambaste the clubby in-crowd that makes up the art world, I have two things

to say:

 

One is right on! The shmoozy aspects of the art game make me puke.

 

Two is, wasn't it ever this way in almost any field where talented strivers compete for

sunlight? Even science is affected by us/them political splits.

 

Better to take this bull by the horns than to cry sour grapes. After all, if the reigning

aesthetes are so superficial, there should be a way to show them the cream in the midst of

all the Coffeemate.<div></div>

[owen_omeara]

Jeff:

 

I was lucky enough to break into galleries about fifteen years ago and have also been lucky enough to have met people who have helped me in my career both by chance and design. This path was full of frustration and hard work, but it paid off. A few suggestions:

 

1)Put together a portfolio of work that is truly a body of work.

 

2)Make certain that the body of work is finished archivaly.

 

3)Seek out galleries in your area that show photography.

 

4)Get to know the people that own the galleries and show them your work. Be prepared for the frustration of rejection and ask every gallery who looks at your work to suggest other venues if they are not interested. Never get pissed off if they don't like your work, that never pays off.

 

5)Never explaine your images by telling stories about them.

 

6)If possible, take a workshop from an established artist and ask for help. This works, believe me on this one.

 

7)Try to find an establised artist to mentor your work and don't get pissed off if they are critical, that never works.

 

8)Go to as many photography openings as possible and get to know as many people at them as you can. There will be snobs and idiots at openings but that is one of the unfortunate aspects of all of this.

 

9)Don't show color and black and white at the same time to the same gallery.

 

10)Hang in there. The entire process can be tedious and a pain in the gluteus b ut if you connect along the road it can be rewarding and a hell of a lot of fun.

 

11)Last but not least, assume nothing.

 

If you find out what the difference between Art and Fine Art, let me know.

 

Peace.

 

-Owen

[yeffe]

Thanks, Owen. Finding a champion or mentor really is the trick. You need someone

established on your side to pick up the phone and vouch for and maybe promote you to

people you'd otherwise never have a chance to meet.

 

"If you find out what the difference between Art and Fine Art, let me know."

 

It's pretty much like watches. Timex is a watch. Rolex is a fine watch. However one rates

art, serious collectors and critics have their egos on the line as every one in their circle

knows what they've bought or written. If the art carries that far, I suppose its fine art. If

later history recognizes the heretofore unrecognized work and bids it up....it's fine art. If a

restaurant charges a 100. prix Fixe...its not no hot dog shack. All the rest falls in a catchall

category of 'the stuff humans make rather than nature."

 

Other than that is personal art used for therapy, documentation, self-discovery, etc.

 

BTW: Have you been successful Owen?<div></div>

[owen_omeara]

Jeff:

 

As David Bayles once said when asked to define "Extraordinar Art."

 

"There are only two types of art, ordinary and extraordinary, ordinary art is all art not created by Mozart." I agree with this.

 

I have had some good fortune. I have been represented on the West Coast in Carmel and at The Robischon Gallery here in Denver. I have also been represented in Seattle. I have been in a few international shows.

 

I have been fortunate enought to teach workshops in figure work both alone and with Kim Weston in Carmel, Denver and Oaxaca Mexico.

 

Have I been able to support myself with my art alone? No.

 

-Owen

[owen_omeara]

PS.Your portrait work is wonderful

 

-Owen

[yeffe]

"Have I been able to support myself with my art alone? No."

 

That's an unfortunate but widely experienced situation. Sheila Jordan, a woman born to

sing jazz and 'art music' at the top of those fields had to work in a Manhattan ad agency

for years as a typist to support herself and her daughter (abandoned by the girl's father).

 

A good friend of mine said that art is good for half a living anyway. When your personal

interests coincide with your work however, there are lots more tax deductions to be taken.

Personally, it's been a struggle...but I've achieved a level of expertise in book jacket design

that's been analyzed by grad students in Japanese history at Stanford (silly crapola, but it

IS Stanford.) But the money still sucks. Striking Harvard clerical workers put it well during

their unionization drive in the mid-eighties: "you can't eat prestige."

 

Thanks for your kind words, Owen. I checked out your page and your figures remind me of

what I've always loved best about Wynn Bullock: the georgeously rendered flesh integrated

via design with surroundings. The passive nature of the models' pose and expression

contributes to a sense that one could very well be looking at a photo of mushrooms...but

what beautiful mushrooms! Your photos are less sentimental than Bullocks (a plus in my

book)...and more aggressively designed. Bullock seems quaint at times, that child nude in

the forest...reminds me a bit of Gene Smith's 'walk through paradise garden."

 

http://www.users.qwest.net/~jmcosloy/index.html<div></div>

[dennisdixson]

Fine art photography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Fine art photography, sometimes simply called art photography, refers to high-quality archival photographic prints of pictures that are created to fulfill the creative vision of an individual professional. Such prints are reproduced, usually in limited editions, in order to be sold to dealers, collectors or curators, rather than mass reproduced in advertising or magazines. Prints will sometimes, but not always, be exhibited in an art gallery.

[owen_omeara]

Jeff:

 

The comparison of Bullock's image to Smith's is dead on. Thanks for the kind words about my site, it will be expanded soon to include images from Oaxaca and some early platinum prints.

 

I am able to do art full time now because I have retired from intensive care medicine. This allows me time I have never had in the past to make art. The retirement is not all that great but the time is and we will see what comes of a concentrated effort.

 

Some of my new work is on Photo Points if you get a minute to take a look there. Thanks again for your comments.

 

The posted definition of fine art photography is as good as I think you can come up with. I had to give a lecture on Photography as Art at the University of Colorado last month and I wish I had seen it prior to the talk.

 

-Cheers

[johncrosley]

I came upon this thread anew in another member's home page, and felt an update was needed, since literally I started contributing to it in 2006.

 

My predictions from then essentially were correct.

 

A prominent PN member who happened to be a software corp. founder and a prominent person in the printing arts -- a man who pioneered software for large-scale printing -- saw my work, liked it, and took it upon himself to say I should show my work outside Photo.net.

 

He sought to introduce me to a former staff member of his corp., now a prominent LA area printer, but that printer declined because of overwork, but in turn promoted me to another printer who, he said 'would change (stating my name)'s life', and so far he has, although so far without gallery representation, but I think not for long.

 

A 15-minute meeting by appointment with this famous printer to the stars, a Lucie award winner, who knows more famous photographers than I even can name, and prints for almost all of them, resulted in a four to five hour meeting at which he reviewed my work on PN and took me to meet the owner of his company.

 

The next night we went to a famous photo fine art gallery 'opening' where he promoted me to his long-time friend, the photo gallery owner as a 'fabulous photographer who soon will be famous' and got agreement to have the owner (who has sold $75 million in photographs since opening some years back, hosts Hollywood stars, and is on the board of the Getty) review my work when 'ready, either to 'watch' my career, or to possibly even rep me, (who knows?).

 

That was followed by six months of this famous printer/art aficionado going through my terabytes of photo captures -- nearly all of them digital, and extracting the 'overlooked' ones as well as helping choose ones he thought should be presented to galleries.

 

Many close and intimate discussions followed about the 'process' of gallery representation and how the gallery/art business works as well as how to approach galleries.

 

He instructed me and began to prepare a 'presentation' to galleries, which currently is being prepared (my Photoshopper gets the assignment this Saturday for a three-week turnaround, as it must be perfect, and that is in excess of my increasing PS skills; this guy is 'perfect' plus with me being in Ukraine now, he is cheap AND skillful as well as underemployed -- he's probably the equivalent of a Photoshop master.

 

Then, I will have the photos I have chosen in exhibition quality, digitized, with great regard given those the famous printer selected, ready to be printed as well as placed into a printed book, all on photo paper (similar to a wedding album but on much thinner stock and with a printed cover of highest quality, as well as a back photo cover.

 

The famous printer had advocated for a very large format presentation, but something I felt was unwieldy, subject to damage and also not portable, so a gallery owner could NOT take it home at night, take it to friends, clients, etc. or just take it in his car home or on the subway or transport it away for a weekend with his laptop.

 

I have opted for 10 x 15 inch bound presentation, and it will actually be a book, hand printed just for me at a very high cost per book.

 

I only have to start with one, but can order as many as I wish over time, AND make changes over time, too.

 

And, this famous printer to the stars of photography (and also Hollywood stars) suggested that some of my work qualified not only as photographic 'fine art' but simply as 'fine art' alone (forget the 'photography aspect') and that may engender a second 'book' to be circulated among 'art' galleries.

 

He took me to (one of) the Gagosian Gallery(ies) where his client (and friend) Sally Mann (Time Magazine Photographer of the Year, 2003), is being exhibited. Gagosian is an 'art' gallery, not a photo gallery, and it is asking is about $35,000 per print for her work, and it's all newly printed work, not work that has value because of its history, and at their rates, they may, he said, lose money presenting her, but they like her for the prestige factor of repping her. (who actually knows, it doesn't sound so economical to me?)

 

(Gagosian has one branch in Beverly Hills, three in NYC, two in London, one in Paris and one in Rome plus I think one planned in Dubai).

 

Anywhere there's big money.

 

He also told me as well as 'aim for highest level galleries' also 'aim for museums', 'at your age, you can't afford to go to local galleries and start from scratch and hope for recognition' -- the same thing the former software exec told me ('suggest you've already 'arrived' and you're making a lateral move') (he's also looking for representation and may well find it, as well as publication for his work which is stunning, but of a different subject/genre; I wish him all the luck in the world.)

 

I also was advised to look at the offerings (on the web) of every photo gallery in the world, and did so after finding a link to all of them, then to compare my work with their offerings, and to rank my work vis a vis their gallery offerings. I did jus that and was surprised how high my work stood; it did rank highly, just as I was told.

 

I was told my work would be 'very popular' and it was 'fabulous' though it never would command extremely high prices, but would sell extremely well and would be 'extremely popular' worldwide.

 

We'll test that hypothesis within the next two to six months when the gallery presentation book(s) is/are published and distributed to galleries.

 

I will break the above 'rule' about (not mixing) color/black and white, as 'street' is my primary genre. I have been told that it's rare a photographer can do each equally well, and I should not allow myself to be pigeon-holed as either a 'color' or 'black and white' photographer, since I can do both with ease, and frequently take both types of photos on a download (desaturating some where appropriate, as I did this afternoon.)

 

All this has taken about seven months, and began sometime at the end of last summer when I first went to see that printer -- after much trepidation. (It took so long because of the massiveness of the work that needed to be reviewed -- two terabytes of downloads -- hundreds of thousands of photos, many of which I dismissed as being 'not worthy, and quite a few of those he found to be 'fabulous' from an 'art' standpoint.

 

At the end, for a while, I even lived with him, shopped for him, and ate evening meals which he cooked (fabulously), then we discussed photography together late into the evenings, many evenings.

 

It's a process I will be eternally thankful to my 'former' software executive/printing industry guru/cinematographer friend whom I've never met face to face who started the whole round of introductions which started the ball rolling.

 

From now on, I know the rules of the game, where I fit in, how to approach gallery owners at the highest level and that I MUST start at the highest level with my work and from a professional standpoint that my work is deemed worthy, not by me but by others whose opinion means something -- something you won't find on Photo.net.

 

One can pay daily fees for prestigious workshops, then extra fees for portfolio assessments.

 

I've been lucker than most.

 

My work spoke for itself; I hardly had to utter a word when I showed my work, and almost was told to 'shut up'.

 

I soon learned to let my work speak for itself; a valuable lesson.

 

I now know, the image is the thing, when dealing with pros of high caliber.

 

They hardly miss anything.

 

I've been lucky, so far, but then again, I'm not repped, and I've not sold anything, but I feel I'm on the right path.

 

But I've been mentored by as good as there is in the biusiness for over one-half year; my time for that has passed, but now I have the confidence I can go it on my own and know what and how to do it by myself, courtesy of a great gift by two men.

 

And much dedication by myself -- literally devoting my life to this pursuit.

 

John (Crosley)

 

(2-21-08)