Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down

Author Topic: Can Peter Lik share his client list?  (Read 26214 times)

ndevlin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 679
    • Follow me on Twitter
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #60 on: December 21, 2014, 02:26:52 pm »

While Peter Lik is a very talented photographer who produces beautiful images, he is a non-entity in the art world.  Prices of this magnitude are paid for collectibility much more often than for actual aesthetics of the item itself.  Where the item is an easily replicable digital print, from a photographer without any established resale history at serious art auctions, collectibility is almost nil.  

Moreover, ask yourself this: would Lik have sold that print for $2 Million? Or $3 million? ..... all to double or treble his previous "high sale"?  Damn right he would have.  So why would a buyer offer three or four times MORE than that gratuitously.  None of this has a shred of credibility or reality to it. To a mental walk-through on this:

"Nice print Peter. Give you a $1m for it."

"No, it's $6.5m".

"Hmm.  It would look great in my living room, but $1.5m's the highest I can go."

"Now you're just insulting me, mate. I said $6.5m. If you want bargain art, we have some Adams prints in the back."

"Well, ok, since my sixth wife also really likes it, I'll go $2m for you, Peter. But that's the limit."

"Piss off."

"I have my lawyer on the phone ready to initiate a wire to your account in the Channel Islands."

"No, sod off you cheap cunt."
    

Not to say truly stupid rich people, ignorant of virtually every principle applicable to the realm in which they are operating, don't exist.  Just saying that the odds of M. Lik finding two of them seems statistically improbable.  

Just sayin'.

-  N.  
« Last Edit: December 22, 2014, 11:20:03 am by ndevlin »
Logged
Nick Devlin   @onelittlecamera        ww

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #61 on: December 21, 2014, 02:31:30 pm »

LOL, that was pretty funny.
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #62 on: December 21, 2014, 02:34:33 pm »

Whether they are seen as "insults" or simply rhetorical tools depends on the thickness of your ego's shield (or is it thinness?).

lol
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #63 on: December 21, 2014, 02:49:59 pm »

This sort of dredging up of past sins is rarely helpful. I do it a bit myself, which lessens me. I try to stick to addressing direct attacks, when I'm getting snarly.

A guy can change his mind. This is an internet forum, not the politburo. We can let afford to let things go.


I am sure Jack is going to explain it better than me, but I do not see any contradiction in what he wrote now and then, nor the reason to apologize. In the earlier post he wrote about Lik's success side, in the latest one about artistic side. Even in the first post Jack said if true, false sale is not cool.


In all seriousness, this is true. I wasn't even (originally) discussing the issue of credibility with respect to his sale.
I was discussing the expressed anger over his "slight" talent. (Even Amolitor said, "I doubt that it's fraud," on page 1.)

Now, of course, if you really want to put the artist Peter Lik under a microscope, he is a walking, talking marketing ploy.

First of all, his name: Peter Lik. Really? ???
Most people would shoot their parents for giving them such a name, or would select something different if re-naming themselves.

Second, if you go to Lik's website, he has more images of himself, than of his work.
He is pretty clearly a walking, talking egomaniac.

But hey ego sells. Self-promotion sells. "Selfies" are everywhere on FB.

Peter Lik has a name most men would never want to have, he promotes himself as much as he possibly can, and he pulls off "sale stunts" all with with the same goal in mind, which is to get the entire world talking about him, thinking about him, and looking at his photography.

And that is exactly what the world is doing. They're not doing it about you, or about me, but about him.

So, yes, I do think there is a lot of jealousy, and I can also see there is room for rightful derision, but at the end of the day, the guy is accomplishing what he is obviously trying to accomplish, publicity ... so you have to give him credit for that.

But, if you can scroll through all the images of himself, he does have a lot of gorgeous images to his credit too.

Jack
Logged

amolitor

  • Guest
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #64 on: December 21, 2014, 03:25:46 pm »

It's a shame that you've chosen to completely mischaracterize what I said, John. Just as a for instance, I never seem to have used the word "skill" in this thread at all, not once.

I said that I could duplicate, roughly, Lik's business. And it is mostly a business problem, not a photography problem. I don't want to. There is no aspect of the process which appeals to me.

I've sold. I've built businesses. I didn't, and don't, enjoy either. What Lik has done is work like fury and build a business. Lots of people have done that. I've done that. There's no magic. It's a lot of work and some mostly learnable processes.

The photography is minor. I'd spend perhaps a year on developing a marketable look and format up front, before moving on to the spadework. If I wanted to go that route, which I don't.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2014, 04:05:48 pm by amolitor »
Logged

amolitor

  • Guest
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #65 on: December 21, 2014, 03:30:58 pm »

Also, Gursky's work is monumentally difficult to execute. Not that difficulty has anything to do with anything. Not that I ever brought up difficulty as an issue.

I can't speak to the others.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #66 on: December 21, 2014, 03:52:16 pm »

... I said that I could duplicate, roughly, Lik's business... I don't want to. .. I'd spend perhaps a year on developing a marketable look and format up front, before moving on to the spadework. If I wanted to go that route, which I don't.

Hmmm... how about coaching me, instead?

amolitor

  • Guest
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #67 on: December 21, 2014, 04:03:34 pm »

Hmm? Sure.

Pick something that you can print large, that's pretty. Stick to narrow color palettes, in complementary colors. Purple/blue + Orange/Yellow, and so on. Read it off your favorite color wheel.

I'd probably work on flowers, I'm pretty good with flowers. Think Georgia O'Keefe, but maybe not quite as close in. I'd have to experiment a little. I'm thinking selective color might be a decent gimmick. Or selectively saturate areas. I'd spend a few months simply developing technique, since you're going to want to print it BIG. There's some technical solutions to be developed here. Shoot sheet film? Digital MF? Get a D810 and stitch? I dunno. It's a thing to be figured out.

Flowers are nice because you save a ton of money on travel expenses.

Then you focus group a few photos, which just costs money, before you settle on a final look. Maybe 6-8 months in you've got a general look sorted out.

Then you grind out a portfolio of as many of those as you can.

Then you open a very small gallery in the best location you can afford. Pay attention, take notes. What sells? What are people looking at? In your copious free time, build out the portfolio (I did mention you'd be working 90 hour weeks, right?) At this point it's just business. Buy a couple books. Hire some people.

At this point my skin is crawling at the very idea. There is literally nothing in the above text that has the remotest appeal to me. I'd rather work at day labor.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2014, 04:06:16 pm by amolitor »
Logged

dreed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1715
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #68 on: December 21, 2014, 07:32:08 pm »

I wonder how he arrives at the price tag...

For example, if you were selling a print and you were prepared to do a run of 1000 prints for something that costs $6500, it wouldn't be a stretch to say to someone that if they wanted to own the only copy it would cost them $6,500,000.
Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #69 on: December 22, 2014, 06:25:43 am »

I remain staunch in my position that all the drama surrounding Lik is good for photographers, because it draws the public's imagination toward high $$ images. As I also clearly said, "Even Lik selling multiple single images in the $20,000-$40,000 range is great. How many of you do this? Other record-breakers don't always make record-breaking sales either."
My girlfriend would be very, very, very, very pleased if I was selling my photos at those prices.  ;D

Quote
High $$ photography is not about "technical skill"; it's about capturing someone's imagination ... or by being being somewhere to capture a great moment.
In fact, go re-read everything I said with my statement giving the musician's quote: there are many "extremely talented" musicians who don't know what a hit song is. Being able to create hit songs is not about technical skill either; it's about being able to capture "something" (some beat/rhythm) that the public wants to buy.

The same principle translates to photography.
Gursky, Sherman, and Stieglitz were not geniuses "technically," but artistically.
A pet peeve of mine in any creative medium is people thinking being technically good at something is better than being creatively good at something. Technique is something anyone can learn and is nothing special, vision however is something you either have or do not have. Most do not have it, no matter how many course they go on to learn how to be a great photographer/painter..etc.
Also in my experience, those who tend to obsess of technical aspects tends to produce work that is aesthetically lacking. BTW I'm certainly not saying good artists are technically incompetent, usually they are very skilled there too. But they are happier to do whatever looks nice over what is 'correct'. You normally have to learn the rules to know how to break or rewrite them.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

donbga

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #70 on: December 22, 2014, 09:17:10 am »

God! Please, can we just move along and let this topic die. It ain't worth the pissing wars going on  over the internet.  ::)

Logged

amolitor

  • Guest
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #71 on: December 22, 2014, 09:51:45 am »

But it's so FUN to watch, gape-mouthed, as various angry people attempt to 'win' arguments with me by pretending I said crazy things which I did not say!

It's as if this was twitter or something.

Logged

knickerhawk

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Re: Can Peter Lik share his client list?
« Reply #72 on: December 23, 2014, 03:26:59 pm »

While Peter Lik is a very talented photographer who produces beautiful images, he is a non-entity in the art world.  Prices of this magnitude are paid for collectibility much more often than for actual aesthetics of the item itself.  Where the item is an easily replicable digital print, from a photographer without any established resale history at serious art auctions, collectibility is almost nil.  

Moreover, ask yourself this: would Lik have sold that print for $2 Million? Or $3 million? ..... all to double or treble his previous "high sale"?  Damn right he would have.  So why would a buyer offer three or four times MORE than that gratuitously.  None of this has a shred of credibility or reality to it. To a mental walk-through on this:

"Nice print Peter. Give you a $1m for it."

"No, it's $6.5m".

"Hmm.  It would look great in my living room, but $1.5m's the highest I can go."

"Now you're just insulting me, mate. I said $6.5m. If you want bargain art, we have some Adams prints in the back."

"Well, ok, since my sixth wife also really likes it, I'll go $2m for you, Peter. But that's the limit."

"Piss off."

"I have my lawyer on the phone ready to initiate a wire to your account in the Channel Islands."

"No, sod off you cheap cunt."
    

Not to say truly stupid rich people, ignorant of virtually every principle applicable to the realm in which they are operating, don't exist.  Just saying that the odds of M. Lik finding two of them seems statistically improbable.  

Just sayin'.

-  N.  

I raised some questions earlier in this thread based on the limited factual information available to us via the press release.  I questioned then why the purchaser (wanting to remain anonymous) would agree to a press release and my reasoning was very much along the same lines as your "conversation" above.  Perhaps it provides no insight into the (in)credibility of the claimed price paid, but I still wonder about the motive of any "anonymous" purchaser who agrees to PR that will obviously put at risk (at least to some tangible degree) the purchaser's anonymity.  Since then I've looked up some information about the purchaser's lawyer.  What's interesting is that he concentrates his practice in art law and representation of artists and patrons.  He's also a serious (albeit young) collector of contemporary LA art and comes from a family of well known museum and art patrons.  The guy is obviously tapped into the art scene and, as a collector himself, surely knows his way around the funny stuff associated with valuations of works of art.  So, in the spirit of your humorous hypothetical conversation between Lik and the purchaser, let's continue with the phone call from the purchaser to his lawyer the next day:

"Hi Josh, I'd like you to represent me on a substantial purchase of three photos by Peter Lik."

"Mr X., I'm glad you called because I remember hearing about Lik Galleries being the subject of a number of consumer complaints, and the secondary market for his work is notoriously poor.  I seem to recall there was a claimed sale of one of his works for a million or so that raised a number of eyebrows.  So, how much are we talking?"

"Well, the whole deal is $10 million and the one I really want is priced at $6.5 million.  I tried to get the price down, but Peter drives a hard bargain.  I really was up against the wall on this one."

[Long pause]

"Ummm...wow...Mr. X. That's a lot for a couple of photos.  You do realize that $6.5 million is well above the highest amount ever paid at auction for a photograph, right?  Have you had any expert appraisals done?  Can I direct you to a few art investment advisors I trust?"

"Well, these are each unique works.  For instance the really expensive one is a one-of-a-kind print.  Well, I mean sort of.  There are a bunch of the same print at smaller sizes but they're all in color.  This one is in black and white!  So it's special, you know? Like, really unique. I mean the fact that the color versions are selling for about 1/100th of the asking price is irrelevant, right?  How would an appraiser be able to give me a good valuation for such a one-of-a-kind work?"

"Trust me, they can do it."

"Well, my wife thinks the photos will look awesome in our Malibu beach house and I really like the works too.  Besides, with the right press release, the publicity will be so great that there will be a feeding frenzy for Peter's work, and they'll surely appreciate in value as a result.  By the way, that's where you come into the equation.  I want to remain anonymous, but I need you to put your professional credibility on the line by attesting to the legitimacy of the sale.  I know that the prior Lik record-breaking sale was questioned by many, so I figure if I have my mouthpiece...eerrr, I mean, 'my lawyer'...listed in the press release nobody will be able to question the legitimacy of the transaction. Smart thinking, right?"

"Ummm, yeah, I suppose so. Considering my stature as a savvy young art collector of contemporary art, putting my personal credibility on the line with no ability to actually say anything of substance about the bona fides of the deal won't be an embarrassment for me.  I'm sure that nobody in the art world will make fun of me for getting involved in what will be widely derided as a sham. It'll actually be a great chance for me to advance my career as a valued advisor to art purchasers, I'm sure, so I'm happy to help out.  Now, let's discuss details..."



Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up