This is one the fellow on the list who is saving quotes should save. Well said and very true.
Shel > [Original Message] > From: Mark Cassino > Hi Boris - > > I have not been following the 'stinkin filters thread, but I'll jump in here > anyhow :-0 > > I sell a fair number of photos, both as individual prints and for > publication, and I also do the occasional art fair and stint on the sales > floor in gallery co-ops, so I've had a chance to see what goes into people's > decision making process when buying photos or other art work. > > To be frank, the general merits of the piece, the subtle aspects and nuance > of design and composition, are more or less secondary in most purchase > decision. Subject is one of the primary drivers. For individual print > sales, people look at the subject matter first, then colors, size, how it > integrates with other decorative objects, and somewhere down the list - the > overall quality of the piece. Color is important - people walk up to photos > and paintings holding paint chips from their newly redecorated bedrooms, and > look for decorations that match them - size is important, and only somewhere > down the line does quality and impact of the work come into play. I've seen > many situations where people stop to admire a particular work, return to it > often, but don't buy it because it just won't work in their homes. So, > except when the for the rare connoisseur or collector comes into play, I > don't think sales of individual pieces means a lot in terms of the pure > quality of the work. You can learn more by watching people's reactions to > photos, than by what they buy. > > Publication photo editors are more sophisticated, but again are driven by > objectives other than just the quality of the work. Size constraints, > aspect ratio, blank space available to have text laid over it, how the piece > integrates into the overall layout and design of the article are all factors > that drive the selection decision. People who are laying out publications > are probably more driven by those issues than just the quality of the > individual piece - for them, the photos that they buy are the building > blocks of a larger work that they are constructing. > > And in all cases - don't forget price. Both individuals and photo editors > are working within budgets, and will juggle their purchases to try to stay > on target. > > And, of course, the trite and the hackneyed have tremendous marketability - > even more than the innovative and sublime. So at the end of they day, I > don't think sales really tell you much. > > I also participate in juried shows and I do think that they provide a good > sense of what a particular individual thinks about your work. Getting in, > getting an award, getting a sense of the competitive field and the > qualifications of the juror are all useful. But it has its limit. I've > talked with jurors who tell me that they are concerned with 'building a > coherent exhibit," so - like the photo editor - they may be looking for > pieces that work together and that may be mean that really spectacular > pieces get set aside, because they don't work with the balance of the whole > show. And with jurors and judges, individual quirks and biases come into > play. You may have a juror who is not a photographer and will judge work > totally differently than a photographer, for example. So, the juried shows > and competitions offer more valuable feedback, IMO, than just sales, but you > are looking at a fairly narrow bit of feedback (the opinion of the judge or > juror.) > > Personally - what really matters is your own feeling about the image. People > bring their own biases and experiences to a photo and that affects how they > react to it. Last year I sold a landscape to someone who had a couple of > family members die at the very place I chose for my photo. For them it was a > very moving image, but in a context totally different than what I intended > when I created it. > > IMO - If you can look at a photo for a year and still like it, if you can > articulate what the photo means and how it expresses that, if you can > understand how the design elements in the image work, then it's probably a > good photo. If other people don't 'get' it - you are hanging in the wrong > crowd. If people see something there that you don't intend (or don;t even > see) - don't let it go to your head. Ultimately, the validation (and harsh > criticism!) has to come from within - I don't think its something that > others can impart, no matter how much stuff they buy, medals they award, or > insults they hurl. > > My two cents! > > - MCC > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Mark Cassino Photography > Kalamazoo, MI > www.markcassino.com > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Boris Liberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net> > Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2005 12:43 AM > Subject: To Herb Chong et al > > > > Hi! > > > > Herb, I followed the "no stinking filters" thread for some time. I have a > > question. > > > > You may argue that if a photo sold, it means that it managed to overcome > > some competition... Hence it is rather good one... > > > > What about those photos that participate in (international) contests and > > get mentions or even prizes? > > > > Boris > >
