Looks Like People Still Care!!

[Rob C]

Rob said the opposite, and I agree with him. It's mostly about luck, not hustle. A degree in business studies is of no help here.

This is not how it works. Gallerists have no interest in artists 'reaching out' to them. Keep the flyers for commercial prospects.

Commerical photography, with its 'art buyers' and 'art directors', might somehow seem 'arty', but photographs made in this context are not art. A commercial photograph is little more than a piece of propaganda.

This is a subjective call, and many famous snappers publicly refute the branding of artist, but whatever they seek as their job description, the fact remains that some of them are exactly that: artists. How else could one classify folks like Penn, for one? Not only a leading photographer but also a pretty decisively good painter!

 As far as I know, few photographers today have the freedom to shoot unsupervised, without a "team" peering into a monitor, second-guessing every click. I was lucky - you see, luck, again - in being in a place and of a time when monitors did not have a rôle in a shoot, and there were very few art directors who felt a need to accompany me; I believe most would actually have preferred not to have to share the blame just in case things turned out not to suit the yarn the accounts people had sold the client! All that digested, I know that my worst work came from client-present gigs: their insecurities were contagious. At the end, you get the gig because somebody likes what you have already done. Why try to turn that guy into your alter ego?

Today, it seems that few commercial photographers get to work alone, however famous they become.

[elliot_n]

This is a subjective call, and many famous snappers publicly refute the branding of artist, but whatever they seek as their job description, the fact remains that some of them are exactly that: artists. How else could one classify folks like Penn, for one? Not only a leading photographer but also a pretty decisively good painter!

Yes, in the world of editorial photography (more so than commercial photography), it's possible to operate in a grey area between art and commerce. However the likes of Penn are rare. Walker Evans managed it. Contemporary examples might be: Wolfgang Tilmans, Juergen Teller, Nadav Kander, Nick Knight - all fashion people.

[rabanito]

Not really.  Probably about 95% of the images I have shot were exactly what I wanted to shoot.  Only about 5% were client directed.  Now I dont get to pick the buildings I am hired to shoot, but at the end of the day, the images were all still exactly what I would have shot.

I didn't mean to be personal but on the other hand, yes, I looked at your webpage.

What I've seen is excellent craftsmanship. IMHO you are an excellent photographer.
But if that's art, is no for me to judge, of course.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I copied part of a statement by one Michelle Gaugy, Art gallery owner, author, art consultant
"What also makes this question more interesting - and somewhat more confusing - is that in that past several decades the definition of artist has expanded greatly. The result is that a significant number of people who heretofore would have been deemed “mere” artisans are now freely using the title of artist as a self-referent. Many craftspeople, furniture-makers, jewelers, clothing designers, hairdressers, etc. etc. now regularly refer to themselves as artists, and their products as art."

The full thing (and ergo in the real context) can be found at
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-an-artist-and-an-artisan

+1

(Also a rare event that I ageee with Rabanito  )

[rabanito]

+1

(Also a rare event that I ageee with Rabanito  )

When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Absolutely this!! If no-one lacked food or shelter - what would they do?

Call their doodling art?

[Robert Roaldi]

I'm not specifically trying to revive this thread but I came across a podcast that is partly on point with a slightly different point of view. Michael Lewis (author of Liar's Poker and many other books) has a new podcast called Against the Rules. Season one's over-arching theme is the collapse of refereeing in today's USA, as seen in many different sectors. There are 7 parts (+ 1 bonus cast) and they're all very interesting, but this particular one addresses the area of "consumer finance" and refers quite a bit to student loans and how they're handled on the ground day to day: https://atrpodcast.com/episodes/the-seven-minute-rule-s1!1c964.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Just a personal pet peeve: I hate podcasts and videos. I have to spend one hour or so on listening or viewing mostly fluff, to hear or see one major point. With written text, I can skim the fluff and find a nugget of wisdom quickly, if there is one. Or go back and forth through text.

This is not to criticize Robert's contribution, as I am sure there are many people who enjoy podcasts.

[rabanito]

Just a personal pet peeve: I hate podcasts and videos. I have to spend one hour or so on listening or viewing mostly fluff, to hear or see one major point. With written text, I can skim the fluff and find a nugget of wisdom quickly, if there is one. Or go back and forth through text.

I'm calling a therapist urgently... I'm agreeing with Slobodan again!
Entering Old Age? 

[Robert Roaldi]

Just a personal pet peeve: I hate podcasts and videos. I have to spend one hour or so on listening or viewing mostly fluff, to hear or see one major point. With written text, I can skim the fluff and find a nugget of wisdom quickly, if there is one. Or go back and forth through text.

This is not to criticize Robert's contribution, as I am sure there are many people who enjoy podcasts.

They are different media and each suited to a different styles of story-telling. Podcasting is radio on demand, and I listen to them mostly in the car, rarely (almost never) listen at home. I find that music in the car lulls me to sleep these days, so short radio mini-docs are perfect for me while driving. In the case of personal interviews, I find radio/podcast unbeatable, a good way to get an intro to a topic.

I'd lump video in a different category than podcasts, they command all your attention, you have to sit, listen and watch. Ok for some things, but a lousy way to understand something complex, for example, for which the written word is still best imo.

[JoeKitchen]

Rob said the opposite, and I agree with him. It's mostly about luck, not hustle. A degree in business studies is of no help here.

This is not how it works. Gallerists have no interest in artists 'reaching out' to them. Keep the flyers for commercial prospects.

Sorry, this is simply not true! 

I know and have attended workshops on the business of fine art photography given by successful galleryists.  (I am an ASMP member and my local chapter has given talks on this, which is why I attended even though I am not a fin-art photographer.)  Although there may be a few loud galleryists that scream they dont want flyers, just like there a few loud art buyers at agencies that scream the same, and stand out because of it, many get to know and become aware of fine art photographers they show by flyers and emails and networking.

And if you bring up and ask about the loud anti-flyer gallerists with the successful ones, most of the time they simply cant understand why anyone in the business would be like that.  It is one of the main ways they find out about good artist worth showing. 

Artists are not magically discovered by sorcerers.  They are introduced, self-introduced, in almost all cases brought on by good business and marketing practices. 

To add my own personal experience to this, I have reached out to several people in the past 12 years of being in business that simply told me that were not interested.  Like a good businessman, I did not take this to mean they are not ever interest only not interested right now, and I persisted by following up every now and then, staying on their radar.  Then, one day, I called and just like that they had a project for me and became great clients.  Same thing happens with artist showing in galleries.  If you only ever introduce yourself once, of course you'll get nowhere.


Insofar as Rob's comment on luck, I am sure his intense hustle when he was younger introduced him to people he was not planning on ever meeting that ended up giving him gigs.  Although these chance encounters were "lucky," without his networking or marketing efforts, they would have never happened. 

This is how all marketing and networking works, hence old business adage, "the harder you work, the luckier you get." 

[JoeKitchen]

You are clearly making it - and well done for that. Did van Gogh make it? How does your art stack up against his?

Unfortunately for Van Gogh he was not able to enjoy the fruits of his labor, and if it were not for his brother's and sister-in-law's great job at promoting (aka marketing) his work after he died, we would not know anything about him either. 

[JoeKitchen]

As an ending on this, I often forget that many on here are hobbyists and amateurs.  Although you may feel this should not matter, it most certainly does since you are looking at photography as an escape from your normal lives, which is exactly what hobbies are for.  In this case, why would anyone want there hobby to be a business?  They would not, and it would be natural to fight this idea. 

Even though I very much enjoy my work, I too need an escape from it occasionally, and cooking is something I very much enjoy doing as well.  I would never want cooking to become a business for me.  However, if I actually wanted to make money from cooking, it would have to be. 

Art is the same way.  If you actually want to make a living from being an artist, you better learn the business side of it, otherwise you will have a very short career.  And the business of art follows the same exact principles of any business, just applied differently. 

Furthermore, if you are looking at being an artist (and trying to make a living at it) as an escape from business, as if it transcends the normal world and works on a entirely different spectrum of rules, that is a rather naive mindset.  The product is certainly different, and the lifestyle too, but make no mistake, to actually make a living at it, you need to treat it like a business. 

[rabanito]

As an ending on this, I often forget that many on here are hobbyists and amateurs.  Although you may feel this should not matter, it most certainly does since you are looking at photography as an escape from your normal lives, which is exactly what hobbies are for.  In this case, why would anyone want there hobby to be a business?  They would not, and it would be natural to fight this idea. 

Hmmm...
As far as I know the fundamental difference between amateurs and professionals is that the amateur does what he wants, an important proposition for being an artist and the professional does it to please Coca Cola or Mercedes Benz or whatever.
The amateur  at his summit "creates" The pro does what others want. Or doesn't sell.

Just my HO

[Rob C]

Hmmm...
As far as I know the fundamental difference between amateurs and professionals is that the amateur does what he wants, an important proposition for being an artist and the professional does it to please Coca Cola or Mercedes Benz or whatever.
The amateur  at his summit "creates" The pro does what others want. Or doesn't sell.

Just my HO

Yet, yet... the pro that's getting Coke or Merc is getting them because they like what he does. He manages to put his identity onto his work, and you can't do too much spoor-spreading if you remain someone else's button-pusher.

There used to be thousands of guys doing exactly as was asked, many made a good living. I don't think any became stars. Today, seems mostly it's the stars still get gigs.

Rob

[rabanito]

Yet, yet... the pro that's getting Coke or Merc is getting them because they like what he does.

Of course.
Just saying that if Vladimir or Adolf like your work it doesn't make you automatically an "artist", whatever that word may mean.
I bet you don't sell them your art but your work, that must not necessarily be "art".
This doesn't necessarily belittle the work of those artisans.

[Rob C]

Of course.
Just saying that if Vladimir or Adolf like your work it doesn't make you automatically an "artist", whatever that word may mean.
I bet you don't sell them your art but your work, that must not necessarily be "art".
This doesn't necessarily belittle the work of those artisans.

Rabanito, you're hedging so many bets so as not to offend anyone that I'm getting lost in the maze!

Your work, if it stands out enough to get you the big gigs, can't avoid showing your stamp, your style/creativity, if you will, and what is your style if not your art?

Rob

[rabanito]

Rabanito, you're hedging so many bets so as not to offend anyone that I'm getting lost in the maze!

Your work, if it stands out enough to get you the big gigs, can't avoid showing your stamp, your style/creativity, if you will, and what is your style if not your art?

Rob

You're right. The problem is that the (catch)words "art" and "artist" are not clearly defined .
And yes, I try to offend nobody.

BTW you owe me a coffee, I looked into that "weebly" thing you mentioned and now I am bogged in a quagmire
(just joking, I find my way alright    )

[Rob C]

You're right. The problem is that the (catch)words "art" and "artist" are not clearly defined .
And yes, I try to offend nobody.

BTW you owe me a coffee, I looked into that "weebly" thing you mentioned and now I am bogged in a quagmire
(just joking, I find my way alright    )

You may be right about Weebly; they seemed to use the same technology or should I say system, for a while, until I got comfortable with it at least, then changed it. Now, to start a new gallery with its own name, the only way I know how to do it is to create a "copy" of the least important one - just in case I manage to wipe the original out by mistake - and then slowly delete the images in the "copy" as I replace them with the ones for the new gallery, at which point I change the original name of the " copy" to the new name I want to use. Then, it's just a matter of positioning it in the list of galleries.

I'm surprised I can still manage that!

Rob

[rabanito]

You may be right about Weebly; they seemed to use the same technology or should I say system, for a while, until I got comfortable with it at least, then changed it.

Hahahaha.
Richard Feynman said once on Physics:
"We can imagine that this complicated array of moving things which constitutes "the world" is something like a great chess game being played by the gods, and we are observers of the game. We do not know what the rules of the game are; all we are allowed to do is to watch the playing. Of course, if we watch long enough, we may eventually catch on to a few of the rules. The rules of the game are what we mean by fundamental physics..."

That's how I felt at the beginning. I got some rules, then a pawn transmuted into a Queen but not always...OMG

There is some fun in it.  I'm creating a great Website that will be ready around 2050