Do lower priced prints sell better ?

[QT Luong]

In another thread, Paul Butzi made a remark that you could make more money by pricing prints lower, because they would sell in higher volumes. Paul's experience apparently has been that
lower priced prints sell more. While this seems a very intuitive proposition, it has been disputed by several photographers (the names of Ken Duncan, Alain Briot, and Dan Heller come immediatly to mind) who all make a living (a very good living in the case of Ken Duncan) selling prints. My own experience is that raising prices did not slow down sales, however I am not too inclined to "experiment" with price points, as I find that somehow unfair to early buyers to lower prices.

[paulr]

It depends on the market. I'm sure Paul's reasonable sounding economics hold sway in some markets, but in others, the opposite has proven true. Price is one of the the qualities certain buyers use gauge the quality of a piece of art. This sounds ridiculous, but the truth is, there are a lot of people who have trouble trusting their own tastes, and they need some serious outside affirmation that they're getting something good.

How do you deal with them? Charge more. They'll feel better about it. Everyone wins.

The long answer is that there a lot of factors. If you're selling in an established market, and if you're willing to let the market determine your prices (not always a given), then I think the best thing to do is base your prices on research or on the experience of your rep or dealer. Succesful dealers tend to know their customers ... that's how they got succesful.

[neil poulsen]

That was the experience of a local pt/pd photographer who now regularly sells on ebay. When he began, he had his prices higher and wasn't getting very far. He lowered them to about $50 or something. Due to increased volume, his overall income from print sales increased. More recently, he's been able to raise prices because some people look for his work.

[Stephen Willard]

I am exhibiting my prints in a gallery as a permanent artists. The gallery is located in a very upscale part of Denver (Cherry Creek) and they are priced accordingly. They are not priced cheap.

I just recently participated in my first art show in Denver at the end of May. Here is the results.

1. Overall the show had poor sale performance.

2. There were about 10 photographers exhibiting there.

3. All of the photographers except myself and one other had purchased power for lighting their prints.

4. My booth was a borrowed rundown tent with prints poorly displayed. Everyone else had beautiful tents with excellent displays.

5. My prints were poorly mounted. My prints were taped mounted and showed wrinkles. Some visitors commented about this and left.

6. My prices were priced considerable less then the others. I priced a framed 16x20 print at $275. The same print is price at $400 at the gallery. I sold $850 of prints which was more than anybody else except one. Most photographers had zero sales. Many visitors commented about how reasonable my prices were.

[Antonio Corcuera]

I certainly wouldn’t lower print prices. As you mention it is unfair for your early buyers, who certainly expect your prices to go up (after all collecting is business too) and a bad sign to your potential buyers who might have been aware of your previous prices.
However, there are other methods that could work: offering larger print runs & smaller sized prints and limited editions (larger prints) of the same picture. In this way you might get the best of both ends. Of course, it all depends on your market, but this is a quite common strategy amongst photo galleries here in Europe who offer unlimited smaller sized prints at usually 1/5 to 1/10 price of, say, a 5 to 10 limited edition. At least this is what I’ve seen lately. Just an idea, might work for your market or might not!

[Joe Lipka]

It's not what you charge, it's what people will pay. Check out this Brooks Jensen blog on selling his photographs. His personal work is digital, but he has sold more than 17,000 gelatin silver prints through his LensWork Special editions series, so he understands photographic marketing.

http://www.lenswork.com/lwb.htm

Look for the September 12 blog, "1,000 photographs."

[Antonio Corcuera]

Dear Tuan, now that I checked your website, I believe your prints are priced low already. I do think your biggest sizes have too large an edition, you know better of course, but do you think you will run-out of an edition of 50 30x45" prints or even of 100 24x36"? Maybe smaller editions (20, max) of these larger sizes at higher prices will have more appeal to serious collectors and could improve cash flow. They will also bring a certain exclusivity that could make the smaller prints more attractive at your actual rates. Best,

[John_4185]

FWIW, I found the ideal, the nirvana of print market pricing some years ago. I limited editions to fewer and fewer prints, and prints to smaller and smaller physical dimensions while raising prices to almost unbelievable heights. From time to time a print sold nonetheless. I escalated until now I've clientel who are quite happy to pay as much as $250,000 for no print at all!

(Here is where the reader wakes up and all the bad guys are run over by a truck.)

[Brian Ellis]

I don't have as much experience selling prints as I'd like but based on what I do have I think it depends a lot on where you're selling them. If you're in a good gallery I think higher prices should be fine, people expect to pay higher prices in a top notch gallery and probably would think there was something wrong if a 16x20 print was priced at $50. If you're selling at an arts festival or arts/crafts fair or places like that where there are a lot of curosity people attending, lower prices probably help. I'd guess that lower prices probably also help if you're selling from a web site.

[Matthew Cordery]

Sell my prints? Now that'd be something.....

[e]

With the economy the way it is right now....The art galleries that catered to the rich (the rich always have money to spend) survived. Many galleries that went middle of the road or cheap are now out of business. This economy wrecked them. My thought regarding this is to have some real expensive items mixed with more affordable ones and then will you have all the bases covered. Emile/www.deleon-ulf.com

[Kirk Gittings]

I don't think there is any easy answer to that. It depends on your market and what you think your efforts are worth and whether you think you can get there with volume or exclusivity. Plus there are alternatives to getting your work to people without giving your prints away too cheaply.

For me since I do so much commercial work that I have a very high sense of value for my time whether it is shooting or darkroom. Also in a sense because of the commercial work I am not dependent on the personal work to make a living. So I price my personal work moderately high because I consider anything less feels like I am giving it away.

The bulk of my print sales are to museums or serious collectors so I also think that pricing the work too low would make them them not take me seriously. So I guess my strategy is exclusivity. When I show in galleries though I like to offer some reasonably priced ways of getting my work short of paying the print prices. For me that is my books which anyone can afford and does not compete with the prints. I may try a line of note cards in the future similar to William Clifts as I have been approached by a big retailer which solves the usual marketing and distribution question.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Kirk touched a little bit on what I was thinking. IMO it depends on your short term and long term goals and your personal situation.

I started selling on e bay as a way to get some quick money to support the photography, but I was aware this was a short term situation. Selling on Ebay allowed me to build a portfolio of 35 images that I consider gallery material while making some money. The long term goal is to achieve something like Michael Kenna. Kenna is represented by 15 galleries which sell and average of 1 or 2 prints per month per gallery at around $1500, you make the math.

Of course, even he started small. The first show I saw of his work was in Houston and at the time the prints were selling for $350, I was in college at the time and could not afford to buy any, but if I had had the money I would have bought the whole kabudle.

I have no doubt in my mind that volume always will result in higher earnings than exclusivity. Ford and GM make a lot more money than Ferrari, but which one would you rather own?

OTOH, sometimes lightning strikes and selling cheap can be a venue for getting your work out there and getting it known. Ray Bidegain while selling on E bay sold a print to the Houston Museum of Fine Arts which has a great photography collection. What were they doing hunting for prints on E bay? I have no idea, but there you are!

It is a balancing act, and without a plan, pricing is a crap shoot.

[QT Luong]

the best thing to do is base your prices on research or on the experience of your rep or dealer

Assuming you use one. The three photographers I mentioned (as well as myself) self direct through three different venues: own galleries, art shows, web. Reps may not be necessary if your work has a large appeal.

Dear Tuan, now that I checked your website, I believe your prints are priced low already.
I do think your biggest sizes have too large an edition, you know better of course, but do you think you will run-out of an edition of 50 30x45" prints or even of 100 24x36"?


This was done with the long term view that prices only go up. As low as they are, my records show that the number of people who click on the pricing page outnumber the people who buy by a factor of at least 100. If I open my own gallery, I think I will sell out my editions. People like Duncan, Lik, Mangelsen sell out editions close to 1000.

That was the experience of a local pt/pd photographer who now regularly sells on ebay

Some venues are better left to people with plenty of time on their hands.

Kenna is represented by 15 galleries which sell and average of 1 or 2 prints per month per gallery at around $1500, you make the math.

$18000/month. Not something that would make me unhappy :-), but I'd be surprised if that what the best on this market can achieve.

[paulr]

"Ray Bidegain while selling on E bay sold a print to the Houston Museum of Fine Arts which has a great photography collection. What were they doing hunting for prints on E bay? I have no idea, but there you are!"

is that true? it's a great story. it means some old curators are learning new tricks.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

is that true? it's a great story. it means some old curators are learning new tricks.

Now Paul, what kind of question is "is that true"? Do you think I would lie about something like this?
You can ask Ray, I will be glad to give you his e mail address.

But I agree it is an unusual story, who would have thought a Museum was buying prints off of E bay....

[paulr]

I believe you, Jorge. Just an expression of surprise, not an interrogation.

If this happened to Ray, my guess is it's not a completely isolated case ... could be that curators are taking more unusual approaches these days. Anne Tucker already has a reputation for being innovative. I wonder where else she shops.

[kthompson]

curators on eBay--they do that in the museum I work in as well. they scan eBay looking for historical photographs and artifacts even, related to the collecting policies. This is nothing new really, they've been doing it for about as long as eBay has been around....not much different than going to tag sales or estate auctions.

[Michael Hewson]

Having visited a Ken Duncan gallery (and being on his e-mail list - a welcome thing) and having purchased a print, I note he markets in all segments and so has a range pf prints (and sizes) - in fact Ken has a range of inexpensive posters too. So he seems to cover various bases ... I wonder if that means there is no optimal size/price point?

[largeformat]

pekanmbr en nmbr

Is there a correct way of testing or finding out your ideal pricing range on your works?

Or at first, from start, let the artist (creator) determine each __ worth.
Then the test of time corrects them north to south.

Supply and demand; adage.

[coops]

5. My prints were poorly mounted. My prints were taped mounted and showed wrinkles. Some visitors commented about this and left.

6. My prices were priced considerable less then the others. I priced a framed 16x20 print at $275. The same print is price at $400 at the gallery. I sold $850 of prints which was more than anybody else except one. Most photographers had zero sales. Many visitors commented about how reasonable my prices were.

Not sure I understand this. Are you saying that because you reduced your prices to $275 from $400, you did a poor job mounting and presenting your work?

[Jim Jones]

Anyone just starting to sell art photographs directly to buyers might best set prices low. Then, if they succeed, gradually raising prices will show clients that the photographs are an investment as well as art. When selling through galleries, the gallery has a right to determine prices.

This will be the 27th year for me to sell at the local annual arts and crafts fair. 10x14 photos matted and framed to 16x20 will sell for $40. This seems appropriate in the rural midwestern USA. It is more gratifying to sell to ordinary people like myself who appreciate the photos than to investors or snobs who evaluate art mostly by its price.

Someone who is a more agressive salesman might well aim at a more sophisticated market. There are always people with more money than taste who can be pursuaded to buy.

[vinny]

Anyone just starting to sell art photographs directly to buyers might best set prices low. Then, if they succeed, gradually raising prices will show clients that the photographs are an investment as well as art. When selling through galleries, the gallery has a right to determine prices.

This will be the 27th year for me to sell at the local annual arts and crafts fair. 10x14 photos matted and framed to 16x20 will sell for $40. This seems appropriate in the rural midwestern USA. It is more gratifying to sell to ordinary people like myself who appreciate the photos than to investors or snobs who evaluate art mostly by its price.

Someone who is a more agressive salesman might well aim at a more sophisticated market. There are always people with more money than taste who can be pursuaded to buy.

I don't know the quality of materials you are using but what kind of profit are you making on these? Any?

[Brian C. Miller]

5. My prints were poorly mounted. My prints were taped mounted and showed wrinkles. Some visitors commented about this and left.

6. My prices were priced considerable less then the others. I priced a framed 16x20 print at $275. The same print is price at $400 at the gallery. I sold $850 of prints which was more than anybody else except one. Most photographers had zero sales. Many visitors commented about how reasonable my prices were.


Not sure I understand this. Are you saying that because you reduced your prices to $275 from $400, you did a poor job mounting and presenting your work?

The thread is from 2005, and I'm not certain that Stephen is active on the board.

Anyways, the pricing and mounting don't seem to follow one another; they are separate. The way that I read it is that despite his prints being poorly mounted he was #2 for sales. If his prints were mounted well, then he would have had more sales.

There is a price point where the customer won't part with their money. Stephen was under that point, and despite having poor print mounting, he did well. A coworker's wife, who is known on the gallery scene, exhibited a series of prints at a show for $2000 each. No sales. (I heard my coworker on the phone with the gallery owner, insisting on the price.)

Consider this: you are at the nautilus gallery. There is an Edward Weston print, Nautilus, 1927, for $1.1 million (link (http://www.vnuemedia.com/pdn/content_display/photo-news/fine-art/e3i7db724a2489ff4cc4b01347362c812c8)). There are also a range of other photographs of a nautilus shell, and it may be the same shell. The prices range from $20 to $50,000, and the print quality is as good as Weston's. Which would you buy? Why?

For Jim to equal Stephen's sales, he would need to sell 22 prints, while Stephen sold three. That's about three per hour for Jim. In a well-trafficked location like a fair, that's a reasonable sales rate. (The honey booth has faster business, though.)

[Donald Miller]

I've found a lot of good information about pricing and sales on Brooks Jensen's DVD on "Finding an audience for your work".

[Jim Jones]

I don't know the quality of materials you are using but what kind of profit are you making on these? Any?

In a good year profits are modest. In the economy of the past few years there was no profit. However, in a farming community people are accustomed to occasional profitless years. People keep on eating, so we keep on producing. I am retired, and photography is only a hobby. The professional photographers in this area struggle for survival.

By buying supplies in quantity, and printing and doing almost all other work myself, it costs maybe $33 to produce an archivally matted photo in a 16x20 aluminum frame.

[Kirk Gittings]

[QUOTE]By buying supplies in quantity, and printing and doing almost all other work myself, it costs maybe $33 to produce an archivally matted photo in a 16x20 aluminum frame./QUOTE]

What is your time worth? If you are not factoring the value of your time you are not being realistic. Create as an artist-market as a business.

[vinny]

I give away a couple prints every year as well.

[Drew Wiley]

I looked at a few eBay prints today and almost howled with laughter at the audacity
of a few alleged fine art dealers. It was like they wanted a thousand bucks for a
Big Mac sandwich without even the fries. A lot of art sales are run on a bluff, but how many of these actually suceed is a different thing. A sucker might be born every day, but there are a lot of different interests trolling for that same sucker's money or vote or whatever. That aside, if one were selling primarily at art fairs and so forth it might be wise to tempt passerbys with something affordable. A dentist might pick up a couple of small prints for his office for two hundred apiece, for
example. Mount and mat is nicely, shrink wrap it to a fomecore backing, but skip the frame. Keep your overhead down. Galleries are a whole different game. They'll take a minimum of 50%, maybe a lot more, and you might be responsible for all the framing, opening expenses, and even insurance. Not hard to actually lose money,
even if you sell some prints. So if you play that game you'd better be getting very good prices or figure out how to bypass the retail gallery game. They do have serious overhead, and the odd of staying in business with a storefront gallery has
always been poor. Most have to run a frame shop on the side. Location is everything
in that game.

[Drew Wiley]

Kirk - the expression, "starving artist", is certainly relevant. A few of the better known local "successful" fine art photographers were exactly that for quite a while.
I preferred to keep my day job, eat real food, and print whatever I pleased. Always factored in my own wage and equipment depreciation, however, when pricing prints. The tide might turn in my favor once I retire. I'll be able to fiddle around more with really stupid things like dye transfer printing, which might fetch a high price per print, but per hour are probably below min wage. Geezerhood has its advantages.

[Kuzano]

If it's true that everything ultimately sells on eBay, then it follows that everyone will eventually buy on eBay. The idea that museum curators are somehow "above" all that are rather moronic. Last time I looked, they also required oxygen and H2O for survival.

[Jim Jones]

[QUOTE]By buying supplies in quantity, and printing and doing almost all other work myself, it costs maybe $33 to produce an archivally matted photo in a 16x20 aluminum frame./QUOTE]

What is your time worth? If you are not factoring the value of your time you are not being realistic. Create as an artist-market as a business.

As Drew said, "Geezerhood has its advantages." I served in the U. S. Navy until retirement. I could continue to serve my community in several ways, but I realistically choose to serve by making this tiny corner of the world a better place through photography. That's a priceless reward.

[John Kasaian]

Photographs with subjects wealthy people don't want anyone to see will always bring in a lot of $$$, especially if the negatives are included. I'm not sure how much digital capture has changed this however.

[h2oman]

As Drew said, "Geezerhood has its advantages." I served in the U. S. Navy until retirement. I could continue to serve my community in several ways, but I realistically choose to serve by making this tiny corner of the world a better place through photography. That's a priceless reward.

I like your attitude!

[mandoman7]

I've been represented by and worked in galleries, but have limited knowledge nonetheless. Still there are some basic observations:
If you don't have a resume and publications (credentials), then a buyer wants a really low price for something they might see and like. If they've seen your name in print, and hear your name spoken by other art professionals maybe, then there's an inclination to pay more. Like with cars or iPhones, people pay absurd amounts for things where there's a buzz, not wanting to miss out on a good thing. People are incredibly affected by the sense that somebody else wants something that they're interested in. It applies to women and cars, as well as art.

To answer the OP's question, high prices without buzz don't work, but low prices when there is a lot of interest can be a mistake, too.

[Brian Ellis]

When I used to make prints in the darkroom and was more actively trying to sell my work on my own (as opposed to through the gallery I used for a while) I charged a fairly high price - $150 for an unmatted 8x10, $500 and up for matted and framed larger prints. I didn't sell many prints. But I priced high because making a duplicate in the darkroom of a print someone saw in an exhibit or on line was a real PITA - and I wanted it to be worth my while if I had to spend hours in a darkroom trying to duplicate a print made weeks or months or years before, which a lower (and more realistic) price for my work wouldn't have been.

Printing digitally has changed that. Now it often takes more creative time to make the first print than it used to take to make the first print in the darkroom. But once that first print is made running off duplicates a week or month or year later is no problem. So I charge very little. I sell a little more in quantity but make much less money than I did when I sold a darkroom print. So for me the answer to the original question is "yes," with the caveat that I'm not a professional and have never wanted to try to make money from photography.

Kirk asked "what is your time worth?" My time isn't worth anything financially because if I wasn't photographing, printing, etc. I wouldn't be doing something that produced money, I'd just be doing some other financially unproductive thing that retired people do. Time is money only when it either produces money itself or takes time away from something that would have produced money if it had been done. I'm not in either situation.

[Drew Wiley]

I don't like being limited to only selling to the rich. Besides, the more big money people
have , the more they seem to haggle! So my strategy works like this: Just like everyone else, not every print I make is a home run. The bellyflops go to the trashcan. The prints I consider up to my personal standard either go to my personal collection or stay at a fixed price. In between are a number of work prints which are really quite nice for general decor etc and fill the niche for those folks who can only budget three to five hundred bucks per print. This still allows me a realistic profit, at least for C prints and black and white work, especially if they have it framed themselves. For Cibachromes, there are always small prints if they want the real deal.
I try to accommodate folks.