Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: certificate of authenticity  (Read 6258 times)

enduser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 610
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #20 on: November 02, 2017, 07:33:18 pm »

We quickly realized that to be in any way successful earning income we had to become aware of selling techniques.  In fact I'd say the art of selling is the most important aspect of the whole art business. Producing a digital file, and printing it well, can be repeated until the finished product is acceptable.
A customer will cut and run at any stage of their decision process and never be seen again. We found no benefit in trying to engage them with production talk. They, on the other hand, wanted to talk endlessly about other things. We let all those discussions run their course.
Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1596
  • it’s not about the photos we take - it’s the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #21 on: November 02, 2017, 08:07:52 pm »

I refuse to be a part of the "editions" scam.  Even if an individual created an "edition" of 100 pieces, normally they don't actually print those 100 pieces, indexically, at the same time, with the same batch of paper on the same printer, with the same ink, under the same circumstances.  This is very rare.  The idea mostly is to "hold open" the edition for a specific number of prints to be made from a single image, as we all know.  Once anything changes in the equation of making prints using all the variables that make up our systems, the edition, for all intents and purposes changes.  The prints vary.

My solution is to label my prints as "A/P" (artist's proof).  And I justify this by knowing/saying that the prints vary from one to another because of the changes in those variables intentionally or unintentionally, and I reserve the right to revisit the original image to rework it, to print it on other substrates, printers or other means.

I won't be held hostage to a system that dictates such implied constraint and confines.  I sell my work based on the originality of each individual print that shares a commonality with other images that have come before it based on that one in-camera capture which evolves over time with the addition of tools and techniques, enabling the image to take on a life of its own.

To play into the editions scam is to give up artistic freedom, or to dishonestly represent that all images in the series will be of exact, unerring standards.

I simply state that I reserve the right to grow as an artist and photographer and explain my position and views on the subject.  For the most part, people nod their heads in agreement when they consider what is at stake, particular when I explain that an A/P is far more valuable than any signed, numbered edition print implying indexicality.

Blood and fingerprints?  Hmmmm, there are a host of bodily fluids which would also work, apparently.

I'll just stick with what the Japanese potter said about not signing his pots when asked how they would be able to tell the difference from fakes:

"What they do that is good will be attributed to me.  What I do that is bad will be attributed to them."  Shoji Hamada

Logged
Mark Lindquist
http://z3200.com, http://MarkLindquistPhotography.com
Lindquist Studios.com

Farmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2848
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #22 on: November 02, 2017, 09:02:30 pm »

or to dishonestly represent that all images in the series will be of exact, unerring standards.

I don't think this is true.  I know, for example, that the most recent Nano Lopez Nanimal that I bought, which is a limited edition bronze, will have slight variations because of the hand creation and processing of each item.  They all come from the same mould made from the same original clay work, but the final finishing can never be identical and there's no expectation that it should be.  Each one is individually numbered and the very nature of the construction process means they're not going to be all done under exactly the same conditions - it just takes too long.  There are a finite number in existence.  It adds to the value, but makes it far more accessible than paying for a unique item (which I also do at times).

There are three levels - none of which are scams or dishonest in anyway.

Unique
Limited Edition
Unlimited Copies

The value of each decreases at each level due to supply/demand.

Since by its very nature a digital image is a file which is frequently replicated, it's unlike a negative in being unique.  Prints, though, can be, or they can be limited, or they can be unlimited.  It's all entirely valid and every artist can provide whatever they choose.
Logged
Phil Brown

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1596
  • it’s not about the photos we take - it’s the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #23 on: November 02, 2017, 10:17:43 pm »

I don't think this is true.  I know, for example, that the most recent Nano Lopez Nanimal that I bought, which is a limited edition bronze, will have slight variations because of the hand creation and processing of each item.  They all come from the same mould made from the same original clay work, but the final finishing can never be identical and there's no expectation that it should be.  Each one is individually numbered and the very nature of the construction process means they're not going to be all done under exactly the same conditions - it just takes too long.  There are a finite number in existence.  It adds to the value, but makes it far more accessible than paying for a unique item (which I also do at times).

There are three levels - none of which are scams or dishonest in anyway.

Unique
Limited Edition
Unlimited Copies

The value of each decreases at each level due to supply/demand.

Since by its very nature a digital image is a file which is frequently replicated, it's unlike a negative in being unique.  Prints, though, can be, or they can be limited, or they can be unlimited.  It's all entirely valid and every artist can provide whatever they choose.

Phil, I wasn't talking about bronzes. If purchased from a reputable gallery or foundry for that matter - it's a different story.  I stand by my position regarding my view of "editions" with digital prints, however.  We all have different perspectives depending on what market level is being discussed.  Agreed - every artist must make their own choices - I have made mine.

Mark
Logged
Mark Lindquist
http://z3200.com, http://MarkLindquistPhotography.com
Lindquist Studios.com

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2017, 12:03:04 pm »

Phil, I wasn't talking about bronzes. If purchased from a reputable gallery or foundry for that matter - it's a different story.  I stand by my position regarding my view of "editions" with digital prints, however.  We all have different perspectives depending on what market level is being discussed.  Agreed - every artist must make their own choices - I have made mine.

Mark
We certainly all have the right to make our own choices and have our own opinions, but calling it a scam implies you feel those of us who do limited editions are being dishonest. The term even implies criminal intent.

I see no dishonesty, nor do I see a need to produce all at the same time.  Limited edition can be stated to mean whatever you want, as long as you state it clearly, unambiguously, and you stick to it.  The sculptor usually limits an edition to the number of pieces that can be produced from a single mold of the original before it wears to the point the art is comprised.  The fact the artist chooses not to make a second mold and continue to produce the reproductions is their decision and whether that weighs into the buyers purchase decision or whether it adds value to the product might be debatable, but really isn't that relevant, it's just how it is.

For a long time now painters have been in the same  position as photographers, and the original concept of limited editions being based on having to print a large number pretty much disappeared.  But they continue to sell limited editions because they choose to, and if their buyers continue to purchase based on those terms, so be it.

If I choose to offer an image and I tell customers that I will only make "x" number of those images, whether I make them all at the same time or not doesn't really matter. Whether I choose to create this "artificial" limit really doesn't matter, whether it's a marketing strategy or not doesn't really matter.  To me what really matters is I live up to the agreement I have with my buyer.
Logged

pearlstreet

  • Guest
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #25 on: November 03, 2017, 04:24:14 pm »

Of the thousands of prints I've made and sold of my wife's art, not one buyer was interested about how they were made. As someone above noted, if you start to explain, their eyes wander off, glaze over a bit and they quickly say thank you and go.
That probably says we sell to a pretty unsophisticated market but it meant that I didn't need a certificate of any sort.  The only extra paper was when a few wanted a receipt for a business purchase.

We quickly realized that to be in any way successful earning income we had to become aware of selling techniques.  In fact I'd say the art of selling is the most important aspect of the whole art business. Producing a digital file, and printing it well, can be repeated until the finished product is acceptable.
A customer will cut and run at any stage of their decision process and never be seen again. We found no benefit in trying to engage them with production talk. They, on the other hand, wanted to talk endlessly about other things. We let all those discussions run their course.

This is some really, really good advice.

Sharon
Logged

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4005
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #26 on: November 03, 2017, 04:58:25 pm »

I still like the concept where the first 10 go for an affordable price, the next 10 for twice the price etc. No limit other than demand and a bonus for the first buyers. If the prints increase in value on the market then this pricing system sets a limit on auction prices and the artist and first time buyers are both rewarded for taking risks while speculation is kept at bay. There are some that use this system as I understand it.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots

Logged

Ferp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 295
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #27 on: November 03, 2017, 06:33:25 pm »

We certainly all have the right to make our own choices and have our own opinions, but calling it a scam implies you feel those of us who do limited editions are being dishonest. The term even implies criminal intent.

Brooks Jenson of Lenswork fame observes that for many (most?) photographers, sales are rare and it is unlikely that a limited edition will sell out unless the edition is very small. He argues that in such circumstances it is misleading and deceptive (perhaps self-deceptive) to limit an edition, since it implies that you expect to sell out the edition. He argues for numbered open editions. For a lot of photographers I think this makes sense. Perhaps not for those who sell a lot and/or who want recognition in the wider art market.
Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1596
  • it’s not about the photos we take - it’s the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #28 on: November 04, 2017, 12:26:04 am »

We certainly all have the right to make our own choices and have our own opinions, but calling it a scam implies you feel those of us who do limited editions are being dishonest. The term even implies criminal intent.

I see no dishonesty, nor do I see a need to produce all at the same time.  Limited edition can be stated to mean whatever you want, as long as you state it clearly, unambiguously, and you stick to it.  The sculptor usually limits an edition to the number of pieces that can be produced from a single mold of the original before it wears to the point the art is comprised.  The fact the artist chooses not to make a second mold and continue to produce the reproductions is their decision and whether that weighs into the buyers purchase decision or whether it adds value to the product might be debatable, but really isn't that relevant, it's just how it is.

For a long time now painters have been in the same  position as photographers, and the original concept of limited editions being based on having to print a large number pretty much disappeared.  But they continue to sell limited editions because they choose to, and if their buyers continue to purchase based on those terms, so be it.

If I choose to offer an image and I tell customers that I will only make "x" number of those images, whether I make them all at the same time or not doesn't really matter. Whether I choose to create this "artificial" limit really doesn't matter, whether it's a marketing strategy or not doesn't really matter.  To me what really matters is I live up to the agreement I have with my buyer.

In this case, “scam” is a figure of speech Wayne. It does not help to try to assign blame for my perspective which you disagree with.  I have no problem with how you view the concept or how you conduct your business, for certainly, that is none of my business and I wouldn’t presume anything otherwise.  How any and all photographers approach their work in terms of sales is secondary to artistry or mastery of craft, so it doesn’t phase me one way or another how anyone either subscribes to that system or chooses not to.  I’m actually surprised you seemed to take that so personally.  Do what you want, think what you want, say what you want.  And I will too.  And I for sure wouldn’t hold it against you for having a different view than I do.

There were a few points I was making that are valid which you did not address, which I assume means you discount my entire arguement. Again that is fine.

To be more clear, I would have to say that I believe this particular mode of sales tool is less than transparent, and as I discussed, does not take into consideration the growth and evolution that some of us experience due to acquisition of tools, skills, insight, and ongoing attempts to master the art and craft of photography and printing.  That is why I believe that if one does an edition, far better to print all in the         edition and close it, rather than having extremely uneven output over a 20 year period of selling the same image because technology (et al), has changed significantly.  And again, your mileage may and probably does vary.  Surely you can see that there are two sides of the very same coin; those who view this system as a way of selling efficiently, or any number of legitimate reasons that photographers decide to control their work that way, and then conversely there are market manipulators who use the system of editions to gain leverage, or control over buyers, auction houses, and in some cases photographers.

So, with all due respect, I believe everyone does need to assess their needs and make decisions about where they stand in this regard.  I respect your position, and wish you the best with it. Think what you will in regard to my stance; I have made my decision and for now, will adhere to it unless something such as hypocrisy changes my mind.

Good luck, sir, I sincerely wish you well.

Mark
Logged
Mark Lindquist
http://z3200.com, http://MarkLindquistPhotography.com
Lindquist Studios.com

deanwork

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2400
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #29 on: November 04, 2017, 07:09:33 pm »

Hahnemühle is doing this to sell more media and try to position themselves as a premier media manufacturer with a history of being concerned about quality issues. I have no problem with that and would possibly do the same if I were in their position.

That is a different situation from the concept of "editioning" a body of work. Of course this concept started with etchings and lithos where the plate or stone deteriorated over time. So the art print was finite and limited. It doesn't make much sense in an era of print on demand, where "open editions" rule the gallery world, or not. Thing is, our inks and media and coatings and ownership change from year to year in many cases, quite unlike in Rembrandt's time in the 16th century when this idea really took off. But we are talking about art in the age of mechanical reproduction and this includes conventional analogue photography as well. It's not a new discussion. I've seen well respected photo historians with opposite views on the topic of "editioning" a photo at all. I believe Ansel Adams position on this was to edition portfolios but not single prints. Same is true of many great photographers.and that is my strategy.

I do limited edition portfolios for clients where they pay to have the edition done all at once with all the same materials and printer workflow and include hand made portfolio cases, little sheet, etc. . To me that makes perfect sense . And because they are digital pigment prints does not mean a project can't be unique and finite.  In that case it is the responsibility of the artist and or his gallery to not cheapen the project by cranking out more similar prints later in the game. But "open editions" does seem very close to being a scam to me. the whole mechanism has gotten so sloppy that I see photographer write the Edition number on the print while they are signing it with no previous thought as to why they are doing that number, who will be printing them in the future, or how the editions of other works in a same or similar series will be numbered.



quote author=Mark Lindquist link=topic=121241.msg1009187#msg1009187 date=1509769564]
In this case, “scam” is a figure of speech Wayne. It does not help to try to assign blame for my perspective which you disagree with.  I have no problem with how you view the concept or how you conduct your business, for certainly, that is none of my business and I wouldn’t presume anything otherwise.  How any and all photographers approach their work in terms of sales is secondary to artistry or mastery of craft, so it doesn’t phase me one way or another how anyone either subscribes to that system or chooses not to.  I’m actually surprised you seemed to take that so personally.  Do what you want, think what you want, say what you want.  And I will too.  And I for sure wouldn’t hold it against you for having a different view than I do.

There were a few points I was making that are valid which you did not address, which I assume means you discount my entire arguement. Again that is fine.

To be more clear, I would have to say that I believe this particular mode of sales tool is less than transparent, and as I discussed, does not take into consideration the growth and evolution that some of us experience due to acquisition of tools, skills, insight, and ongoing attempts to master the art and craft of photography and printing.  That is why I believe that if one does an edition, far better to print all in the         edition and close it, rather than having extremely uneven output over a 20 year period of selling the same image because technology (et al), has changed significantly.  And again, your mileage may and probably does vary.  Surely you can see that there are two sides of the very same coin; those who view this system as a way of selling efficiently, or any number of legitimate reasons that photographers decide to control their work that way, and then conversely there are market manipulators who use the system of editions to gain leverage, or control over buyers, auction houses, and in some cases photographers.

So, with all due respect, I believe everyone does need to assess their needs and make decisions about where they stand in this regard.  I respect your position, and wish you the best with it. Think what you will in regard to my stance; I have made my decision and for now, will adhere to it unless something such as hypocrisy changes my mind.

Good luck, sir, I sincerely wish you well.

Mark
[/quote]
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #30 on: November 05, 2017, 12:06:52 am »

In this case, “scam” is a figure of speech Wayne. It does not help to try to assign blame for my perspective which you disagree with.  I have no problem with how you view the concept or how you conduct your business, for certainly, that is none of my business and I wouldn’t presume anything otherwise.  How any and all photographers approach their work in terms of sales is secondary to artistry or mastery of craft, so it doesn’t phase me one way or another how anyone either subscribes to that system or chooses not to.  I’m actually surprised you seemed to take that so personally.  Do what you want, think what you want, say what you want.  And I will too.  And I for sure wouldn’t hold it against you for having a different view than I do.

There were a few points I was making that are valid which you did not address, which I assume means you discount my entire arguement. Again that is fine.

To be more clear, I would have to say that I believe this particular mode of sales tool is less than transparent, and as I discussed, does not take into consideration the growth and evolution that some of us experience due to acquisition of tools, skills, insight, and ongoing attempts to master the art and craft of photography and printing.  That is why I believe that if one does an edition, far better to print all in the         edition and close it, rather than having extremely uneven output over a 20 year period of selling the same image because technology (et al), has changed significantly.  And again, your mileage may and probably does vary.  Surely you can see that there are two sides of the very same coin; those who view this system as a way of selling efficiently, or any number of legitimate reasons that photographers decide to control their work that way, and then conversely there are market manipulators who use the system of editions to gain leverage, or control over buyers, auction houses, and in some cases photographers.

So, with all due respect, I believe everyone does need to assess their needs and make decisions about where they stand in this regard.  I respect your position, and wish you the best with it. Think what you will in regard to my stance; I have made my decision and for now, will adhere to it unless something such as hypocrisy changes my mind.

Good luck, sir, I sincerely wish you well.

Mark
I strive very hard to avoid being antagonistic or argumentative in online forums. I see far too many discussions get out of hand and things said that would never be said face to face in a discussion.  Usually I check out of discussions when I'm afraid of coming across this way, I certainly don't want to be misinterpreted, but thought I might make a few points.

First while you call your use of the word "scam" a figure of speech, I've never seen that word used in any manner other than a very disparaging way and never seen it used in any context other than the viewpoint of describing someone who is intentionally being dishonest or deceitful in an effort to take advantage.  The choice of the word and your comments clearly indicated your strong opinion of the issue, thus my statement.  Certainly I understand that often we might use words that perhaps convey a stronger sentiment than intended, especially in an online forum where, but certainly you can see where they could easily be construed in the manner that I felt.

Regarding my not addressing the points you made, I just didn't take the time to discuss them. whether I discount them or not has no bearing on the discussion, and while they are  valid to you, perhaps others don't share your point of view and thus they aren't valid to them. The idea that an edition is from a single printing and all pieces are identically produced at the same time morphed a couple of decades ago into it's current use in the art community to a more general meaning that only a limited number of reproductions of a piece will be made, upon which point no more will be produced. I don't think many artists produce work like that anymore, with todays technology they produce as they are sold. The term to most might be interpreted to say each piece is an edition, and there is a limit to the total editions that can be made.

  I'm just saying that's how it is, it's not a photography thing.  Unfortunately to your point, this has been the focus of a couple of major cases where the photographer used "new technology" to produce a new edition from old film or transparencies to exceed their original sold out edition. To me this was unethical, (although unfortunately the court ruled in the photographers favor).

As it stands now, in the broad art community/market (of which we photographers really are a pretty small part) a limited edition is a common and expected practice, and simply means placing a limit on how many reproductions will be made. those limits run the gamut.  Most, like me, simply say that after I produce x number of prints/pieces from a specific file, no matter the size or on what media, no more will be produced.  Doesn't matter if some are on metal, some on canvas, some acrylic facemounts, or some on fine art paper.  Doesn't matter if all are 27x54, or if I make 6 different sizes.  After x number, no more.  Others specify in the CoA many parameters, such as size limits, for example only x number will be produced of x sizes.  I do see see some that are ambiguous saying things such as only x number will be produced of any individual size, but don't actually list the sizes allowed.  There your point of transparency becomes very valid, because I could produce x number 20x24's, then produce the same number 20.5x24.5, and so on and so on, meaning that in reality there isn't much of a limit. However, even in this case I think the photographer offers some specific sizes on the sales page and intends to limit it to those sizes. They just didn't write their CoA very well.

As far as transparency, I'm not sure what else could be done.  A clear, unambigious statement to the buyer as to what the work is limited to seems pretty transparent.

I know many in this forum struggle with this concept. It seems to pollute something we are passionate about.  I myself have struggled with it for years.  Same with the word giclee.  I hate it. I hate saying it, I hate using it.  But the practice is so common that most buyers who can afford to buy the work are familiar with both the concept of the limited editions as well as "giclee" prints, so I don't really ever have to discuss what limited edition means, and just using the word giclee is easier than trying to explain how stupid it is and what it means.

Now that I have my own gallery, I continue to struggle with it. In my case, I chose to offer some of my work in limited editions, but the majority of my work is offered in open editions.  The pieces that are limited edition are approximately 30% more simply because their ability to provide revenue may end at some point in time. 

But the reality is pretty simple.  The concept of limited edition works is standard procedure throughout the art marketing community.  In a typical art festival, photographers are limited to only 10-15% of the total spaces available so we're pretty much a slice of a much bigger pie.

 It's just how it is.  If you want to play in their pool, you play by their rules.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2017, 12:22:16 am by Wayne Fox »
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #31 on: November 05, 2017, 01:35:40 am »

I still like the concept where the first 10 go for an affordable price, the next 10 for twice the price etc. No limit other than demand and a bonus for the first buyers. If the prints increase in value on the market then this pricing system sets a limit on auction prices and the artist and first time buyers are both rewarded for taking risks while speculation is kept at bay. There are some that use this system as I understand it.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots
For years I've tried to figure out a way to use a concept similar to this.  My idea was that each print was an edition, and the price would increase a specific amount for each edition.  As the number of pieces sold the "limit" would eventually be set because of the price/value.  If indeed someone wanted to exceed the "limit", no problem because early buyers benefitted.  The value proposition as prints sold would be clearly defined.

But I've never figured out a way to do it.  How do I create on online sales system which would account for it without having literally dozens of price lists to account for the the available options.  How do I explain it easily to customers without their eyes glazing over and checking out.  How do I communicate the concept on the piece?  Anyway, I've just never found a comfortable way to use the concept.

But I really like it, so I haven't given up. Someday I'm going to figure out a way to try it.
Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1596
  • it’s not about the photos we take - it’s the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #32 on: November 05, 2017, 07:52:08 am »

Wayne,
You have made your position and your views clear, (thanks for taking the time and making the effort to do that).  I could have used the word imbroglio rather than scam, or whatever, but I do see imposing “artificial scarcity” as inherently manipulative, as many other photographers who share my views do.
I agree that online discussions are inherently easily misunderstood, and in face to face dialog, often issues of disagreement are handled in different ways.

So we have differing viewpoints, or more precisely, we each subscribe to differing beliefs about the subject of signed, numbered, limited editions.  I understand how deeply invested you are in this (as are many, many others), and I wish you well with your useage of the system, however you define it, and I respect your sincerity and position regarding your decisions.

I feel there is no point in discussing it further as it is apparent we both have differing perspectives which insofar as online conversations go, we both likely think we understand each others views.

Agreed, it is not an issue easily to be solved, and I agree with your assessment of the term “Giclee”.

Thanks again for your effort to clarify your points, I appreciate that you didn’t just back away from our conversation.

Best,

Mark
Logged
Mark Lindquist
http://z3200.com, http://MarkLindquistPhotography.com
Lindquist Studios.com

nirpat89

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 661
    • Photography by Niranjan Patel
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #33 on: November 05, 2017, 08:05:42 am »

For years I've tried to figure out a way to use a concept similar to this.  My idea was that each print was an edition, and the price would increase a specific amount for each edition.  As the number of pieces sold the "limit" would eventually be set because of the price/value.  If indeed someone wanted to exceed the "limit", no problem because early buyers benefited.  The value proposition as prints sold would be clearly defined.

But I've never figured out a way to do it.  How do I create on online sales system which would account for it without having literally dozens of price lists to account for the the available options.  How do I explain it easily to customers without their eyes glazing over and checking out.  How do I communicate the concept on the piece?  Anyway, I've just never found a comfortable way to use the concept.

But I really like it, so I haven't given up. Someday I'm going to figure out a way to try it.

Wayne:

You can use some sort of compounding formula with a fixed incremental appreciation for each edition/print.  For example, say you decide your next print should be 10% more than the previous one.  Starting with the first print priced at say 1 unit, the next one would be 1.10 and the next 1.21 and so on.  For 10% increment, the price will double approximately 8 prints.  For 5% increments, it will double every 15 prints.

As the price increase is slow in the beginning, the early buyers are rewarded amply as their prints value goes up rapidly later if the image becomes popular by the miracle of compounding, yet each new buyer is paying only incrementally higher than the previous one.  You can even put a calculator next to the print to show where the price will be as more prints are sold.   The total number of editions are limitless, yet limited because the price will become too big at some point for your customer.  Of course, by publishing your pricing scheme, you are locked in to fulfill it even if the circumstances change. 

:Niranjan
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #34 on: November 05, 2017, 11:43:02 am »

Wayne:

You can use some sort of compounding formula with a fixed incremental appreciation for each edition/print.  For example, say you decide your next print should be 10% more than the previous one.  Starting with the first print priced at say 1 unit, the next one would be 1.10 and the next 1.21 and so on.  For 10% increment, the price will double approximately 8 prints.  For 5% increments, it will double every 15 prints.

As the price increase is slow in the beginning, the early buyers are rewarded amply as their prints value goes up rapidly later if the image becomes popular by the miracle of compounding, yet each new buyer is paying only incrementally higher than the previous one.  You can even put a calculator next to the print to show where the price will be as more prints are sold.   The total number of editions are limitless, yet limited because the price will become too big at some point for your customer.  Of course, by publishing your pricing scheme, you are locked in to fulfill it even if the circumstances change. 

:Niranjan
It's not a pricing scheme that is challenging, it's being able to communicate it and use it as an effective marketing tool that I find challenging. I feel it's something that you have to make enough effort to explain and try to "sell" the customer on the sales  process itself gets side tracked and you lose the customer. The price discussion becomes something more than a simple this is how much it costs.

Logged

Farmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2848
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #35 on: November 05, 2017, 04:39:30 pm »

The only issue with the proposed scaling of price, is that it assumes that someone will pay that higher price.  If they don't, you'll never sell it and the previously communicated price pressure will have been misleading.

If you have a limited edition and it's popular and you are down to the last few, you can probably raise the price, but having it set to raise could be problematic unless you're an established artist and you know that the earlier prices are genuine discounts on the market price.
Logged
Phil Brown

enduser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 610
Re: certificate of authenticity
« Reply #36 on: November 05, 2017, 05:29:30 pm »

For us, a good sale was a quick one.  It was customers who went on and on about how they were good friends with The Duke of Bedford, or always got an invite to The Goodwood Speedweek or they have an amazing camera or their daughter is at The Royal Academy.  The worst ones drone on ending up with stories about their dog.
My wife and I recognized that a lot of people don't have anyone at home and just love to talk when they find listener.  We never did have the time to develop a spiel like Mark's, although I do recall a similar conversation the last time we bought a car.  ;D
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up