Call for Artists, Making Money at Juried Art Fairs, Craft Shows and Festivals
In art fair circles for years there has been talk about buy/sell and reps showing up with someone else's work. I found this meeting mention in The Orlando Sentinel:
Artists participating in the Winter Park Sidewalk Art Festival are set to meet Friday evening to discuss forming a commission that would set standards for work displayed at art festivals. The purpose of the commission would be to certify that work in an artist's booth was in fact created by the artist, according to photographer Les Slesnick, who is organizing the gathering. The meeting will happen in the Rotary Beer Garden just south of Morse Boulevard just after the festival closes at 6 p.m.
Does anyone know anything about this? Or have any suggestions we could share with Les?
Come On Nora.
Lehigh. Norfolk State. Ohio (not Ohio State...) NC State, VCU
My alma mater Murray State.
Surely there is one you can root for!
Thanks, but that's too bad. I pitied the Duke fans who saw them lose in Greensboro, until I met a lady who didn't get to see them lose at all. So sad. Never gets old. There's always YouTube!
You forgot Michigan State, my alma mater. See you at the final four.
Barry, BOOOO, why do I always seem to disagree with you!!! Louisville with have its way with State. I won't put money on it though.
PS. I didn't see your name listed on the exalted website, what's up with that?
Becky, I wasn't aware that we disagree about anything. To prove it, I was very happy that Lehigh beat Duke.
I've seen Louisville play. No way are they going to beat MSU. They couldn't even beat South Florida.
If Louisville doesn't get you, I hope my MSU plays your MSU.
There's a good chance of that happening. Murray State only lost once all season. Michigan State had the toughest schedule in the nation and is a very experienced team. Either way, to get to the Kentucky game, both teams have to beat NC.
I'd have to root for Michigan State since Michigan, my alma mater, is now out of it. I'm more of a college football fan though and don't really follow basketball much.
I love your humor, Becky,,,,after 30 years on the street with my work, it is unbelievable to me that I now have to PROVE myself to ONE self proclaimed expert so I can go on doing what I do ? Please.
Demanding shows follow their own rules and police their shows more carefully is the correct direction to be taking. Not this !
Thank you for the report and the reminder that we all have a way to provide input even if it is unsolicited.
Thanks for this report, Jim. I hope you had solid sales on Friday and the rest of the weekend brings fair skies and deep pockets.
Thanks, Jim for the update and the web link. I respect the opinion of everybody that has weighed in but I guess I am seeing this in a different vein. Since I don't really have any "skin in the game" - not as an artist or art show artist, not as a director or any connection to the industry anymore, I think as an art patron, I can weigh in with only that 2cents - I hope my thoughts here are not as disjointed as I sometimes feel. I'll try.
I like the concept of accreditation, not only for shows but what it gives the patrons as a promise of standard measure. This is what sets artist apart - whether self-taught or formally educated - from those that want to just make a quick buck in the merchant/vendor oriented field of fine art shows.Regardless of creative concept, artist should know their materials, methods and be able to warrant their work to that degree.
I can think of several other professions that have accreditation processes to distinguish those that should be so-called experts/professionals in the field from those that only perform a task in the same field. There are also different levels of accreditation in many professions/jobs, so this is not a new concept at all.
At this stage of the game, there seems to be a "promise" attached to the accreditation process as it is shown on the website - I like this feature A LOT. It seems to me that (many) shows want to tout a warrant about the work that is contained in their show - You know, the "made by the creator" theme, artist present, etc. - how can they do that if they do not have the ability to verify. The accreditation summary, as presented on the website, takes it a step further - it gives verification to not only art shows but to the buying patrons too.
Maybe it is time to put certification of who you are ( in the general sense) and what standards of knowledge and materials is used in the work into the mix. Seems to me it could bring UP the standards of art and fine craft in the venue.
I understand that many of you think that this verification should be done by the shows during the jury process but as we can tell from the history of the venue - that has not worked because of a lot of factors at both the show level and their (respective) jurors. This concept seems to be designed to give this review of a set standard to members of your own profession - I think that is the easiest way and the most direct way to handle this measure as long as there is disclosure to all concerned.
When I buy a work, I judge the creativity, the workmanship, the command the artist (and fine craftsman) has with the medium - the materials used and their longevity may not be apparent to me and yes, I would like some assurance that the work is gonna stand the test of time. Now that "time" definition may vary according to the final use that the patron has in mind but I like to think of art that I buy as forever.
I want to know by who's hands the work has been done and that is not to say that I would not buy some work with multiple hands depending on the nature of the work - it is disclosure and the warrant that concerns me more. If I buy it at a show that touts a specific standard (show description) of the artist in participation, I should be able to rely upon that warrant but as we all know, many times that is falling short.
With those consideration, I have to surmise the price I am willing to pay and how that measures with the posted price.
As a measure, this accreditation seems to only be verifying the who and the what - I see nothing wrong in a set disclosure method.