best way to market pics ...
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: John Navas on 28 Jun 2010 13:57 On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:24:01 GMT, in <5g2Wn.7918$Z6.7376(a)edtnps82>, "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: >Just curious, do you think pics sell better signed or unsigned? Signed if you're famous; unsigned if you're not. -- Best regards, John Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: David Ruether on 28 Jun 2010 15:17 "John Navas" <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:ejoh26llf52koifhnce18o521ka7ledshq(a)4ax.com... > On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:24:01 GMT, in <5g2Wn.7918$Z6.7376(a)edtnps82>, > "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: >>Just curious, do you think pics sell better signed or unsigned? > Signed if you're famous; unsigned if you're not. > -- > Best regards, > John I think most purchasers of photographs intend them as art, and they also may wish for the possibility of value appreciation (even if that is unlikely for most photographs, and a poor reason for buying one...;-). So, the answer is to sign the photographs you sell - it takes but a moment to do and it may increase the value to buyers... --DR
From: John Navas on 28 Jun 2010 15:53 On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:17:58 -0400, in <i0ash7$6ll$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu>, "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote: >"John Navas" <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:ejoh26llf52koifhnce18o521ka7ledshq(a)4ax.com... >> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:24:01 GMT, in <5g2Wn.7918$Z6.7376(a)edtnps82>, >> "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: > >>>Just curious, do you think pics sell better signed or unsigned? > >> Signed if you're famous; unsigned if you're not. >I think most purchasers of photographs intend them as art, and they >also may wish for the possibility of value appreciation (even if that is >unlikely for most photographs, and a poor reason for buying one...;-). >So, the answer is to sign the photographs you sell - it takes but a >moment to do and it may increase the value to buyers... Then why do you suppose most art photographs sold have no signature? Are they all missing a great opportunity? Sellers could sign them and the buyers wouldn't even know the difference. ;) -- Best regards, John Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: Kyle Abhams on 28 Jun 2010 16:07 On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 09:11:30 -0400, "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote: >But, several local photographers are fairly successful >either maintaining a weekly booth at the Farmers Market for direct >sales, or setting up booths at various events, like the yearly music >festival, apple-harvest, chili-tasting, art-sale, etc. This would be his best bet. Those that felt pity for the "blind photographer" sitting alongside his snapshots would buy his "art" out of guilt. Making sure he is sitting there with dog and white-cane at all times to get that message across. Not one of his snapshots would sell on their merits alone. A bit like buying a Parkinson's-afflicted scribbling from someone in a wheelchair at the park who looks like he needs a meal.
From: Savageduck on 28 Jun 2010 16:13
On 2010-06-28 12:53:08 -0700, John Navas <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> said: > On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:17:58 -0400, in > <i0ash7$6ll$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu>, "David Ruether" > <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote: > >> "John Navas" <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >> news:ejoh26llf52koifhnce18o521ka7ledshq(a)4ax.com... >>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:24:01 GMT, in <5g2Wn.7918$Z6.7376(a)edtnps82>, >>> "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: >> >>>> Just curious, do you think pics sell better signed or unsigned? >> >>> Signed if you're famous; unsigned if you're not. > >> I think most purchasers of photographs intend them as art, and they >> also may wish for the possibility of value appreciation (even if that is >> unlikely for most photographs, and a poor reason for buying one...;-). >> So, the answer is to sign the photographs you sell - it takes but a >> moment to do and it may increase the value to buyers... > > Then why do you suppose most art photographs sold have no signature? > Are they all missing a great opportunity? Sellers could sign them and > the buyers wouldn't even know the difference. ;) My understanding regarding prints (photographs and other fine art prints), and limited edition prints, is to number the matte "1 of 50" "10 of 60" "35 of 100" or such, and initial, sign, or appropriately emboss the matte next to the number. -- Regards, Savageduck |