Hello
I writing this blog post at the close of my career at being artist who sells photography at arts shows. In the past 12 years I seen a lot of changes in what type of photography is being accepted at various 'A' shows and 'B' shows across the country. There was a time early on when I was making really good money doing 15 to 20 shows a year. Then of course the recession hit and then all of sudden to make that same type of money I ended having to double the amount of shows I would do in any given year. In 2012 and 2013 I participated in 30 plus shows. I've been privileged to participate in some of the best shows in the whole country. However it is my belief that trying to sell 'realistic' landscape photography at a art fair is becoming a dead concept and/or that it is dying a slow death. Why? It is because of simple supply and demand.
This year and most of last year I have had more people come into my booth armed with their cell phones eggerly excited to show me their shots of most of the places that I have shot myself and have images that are for sale on the walls in my booth. Should I be surprised? No, today's digital cameras are more than capable of producing incredible images with little or no expertise. Because of the glut of photography on the market and in the hands of the prosumer market it should be little or no surprise to any of us that this one reason alone is why most photographers who participate in art shows are having a hell of time making money.
Photography is the only art medium that is a category in the jury process that has the easiest path of access in order to participate in a art show. I belong to several facebook groups that discuss art shows. In any given year I see more and more people who caught the 'photography' bug and inquire about how to do art shows. The added competition is driving the photography category into irrelevance. The juries for most of the best shows in the country are sick and tired of seeing that same old shot of the maple tree from the Portland Japanese Garden or that arch from Canyonlands etc.... Juries from shows such as Fort Worth, La Qunita, St. Louis, etc... are accepting work that only pushes the boundary of photography. Photography that is 'artistic', or abstract.
So if it is near impossible as a landscape photographer to get into the 'A' shows today, then what happens when in the future most 'B' shows get tired of seeing the same old landscape photos? Ten years from now what happens with landscape photography? Is there even a market for it? Currently the the glut of supply on the market is not going to change, it will probably get worse. Digital photography is not going away. Digital camera's will get easier and easier to use.
There will always be some individual armed with a digital camera who takes landscape photography who decides to sell his or her photography at a arts fair who want to know the ins and outs of selling at fairs. Instead of telling them, buy a set propanels, get a trimline canopy etc... Don't we owe it to them to be honest on how difficult it is to make it in this business? Don't we owe it to the people who join the art fair circuit as landscape photographers that the idea of supporting a family and selling your photography at art fairs is simply unobtainable?
David
Comments
Oscar, how was Loring Park for you? I stoped for a moment at your booth this morning, before we opened, and we said "hello" but I didn't have time to chat. That was me. Was the show good? My sales were quite slow today and I ended up with about $1800 for the weekend. Not great but not uncommon, judging by the other artists there that I spoke to.
Cheers,
Lawrence Sawyer
Have you thought about how you display your work? Ten fabulous pictures in a row look like 10 pictures. If you present your work in such a way that the customer can imagine how it would change a room, then you have placed the piece in the clients imagination.
Get some ideas from the online mass sellers and then improve. It might not be only that pictures can be easy for folks to take, but rather lack of imaginative marketing. I'm in a different media, but when I greatly improved my presentation, sales went up a lot.
Steve, I am happy with 35,000 to 50,000 in net income per year. That is good for me. Traveling time is not something I consider an expense. I do not buy equipment if I do not need or is time upgrade. How you expend in your equity if your choice. I still rather do this and make the same or more than going at a 9 to 5 job earning $15.00 per hour or even $25.00 per hour. This is not for everybody and you need to adjust to what you earn.
It does help that I have nobody else to take care other than me.
Good point, Britt. Is it all about the bottom line? I remember thinking I was working for about minimum wage at times and yearned for a real job. But in the end it did work out. Hard work, perseverance, imagination were needed and that job could not satisfy the need for adventure and tackling the uncertain.
I heard this recently on a documentary: Better hand to mouth than 9 to 5.
I don't think landscape photography is dead. I do think it has been severely wounded because of many reasons and has hit a much lower level and will stay there forever. Once Office Depot sells 24" X30 " printers with photo paper for $99 it will be dead.
You might want to take some future old familiar landscapes from a new perspective with a drone. I see these selling but its big investment. I see new perspective pictures of my city selling well. Everyone loves there city. It may be possible to quit the travel all over the country and concentrate on pictures close to home for only the people close to home.
Allison, you are so unique! I've never seen another photographer like you.
Yeah, photographers do have it bad in this arena. Lime Connie said, we all have some deal to deal with. You have no idea how much I hate those stupid wine and painting "night outs". Let's get tipsy and "learn" how to paint, and now we vmcan just hang our own "art" up in the wall...
It has seemed that traditional photographers and traditional painters have generally not done very well in Colorado this year. Many of us are scratching our heads. And yes, you need to shot what sells/know your market (even sold a mesa arch today to someone that saw us at the last show).
Oscar, that seems to be a range that I hear more commonly and that is not worth my time. If doing this full time, 20 shows averaging 3k, minus travel expenses, booth, cost of goods, camera equipment, etc, is the resulting $ actually any better than working full time at McDonalds? Nope.
Alison, Hal, Oscar and Larry say it perfectly! You can't have that canyon shot (e.g.), no matter how good it is, and expect to get into the shows, or even sell it to someone who has been there. Make sure your work doesn't look like everyone else's. No postcard images. Find or create something that is yours. People will buy landscape but it has to be something they haven't seen, or don't think they can do with their own point and shoot.
Yes, Karen, you are also correct. Other media have their bug-a-boos also and you are right pointing that one out. The advent of giclees has just about killed printmakers, painters who want to only do originals are in lots of trouble, ceramicists battle imports as do jewelers. What media did I miss here?
David, When trying to jury for art shows it can be difficult. As the photog who submits truly different, original work and, at times, not accepted. Then I go to the show or research and see some of what was accepted is just as has been stated. The same old composition of a landscape that has been done infinitem. Also manipulated, through software, beyond what was actual or realistic. Yet this is what many jurors want. Hence this is what the patrons see. They tend to buy what is easily recognized / remembered. More exposure, more sales.
A good amount of my work is purchased by other professional photographers.
The cameras you speak of and the process used supersaturates and changes the image. Unless those photogs understand lighting, composition & DOF. They cannot capture the same image an artist will acquire.
I agree, the field is very difficult. We need to be different. We need to educate. Yes, sometimes, I get the customer coming into my booth, showing me their cell phone pics. However, most of the time, I get the customer saying "Wow, you have a great eye". They do not, often see or encounter the same image, I have.
With your years of experience, you are likely, able to find shots that they would never dream of, nor have the ability to capture.
Also, as to the cameras used today being able to create such great shots. Remember, as Ansel Adams, with his pinhole camera, proved it is not the camera, it is the photog who makes the picture.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next