What Makes a sellable photograph?

[Bob Salomon]

It is good to be able to hang a photo on the wall and then wait a several months. If I still stop and look at it as I walk by occasionally, or if it catches my eye as I sit in the room, then I know I have made a "sellable print". I took and worked with the image! If I do not keep up interest in it over a long period of time, how can I expect someone who does not have that experience of creating it, to pay any attention to it on a wall?! (let alone buy it).

But I moved into a new (but old) home in July, and the lights suck -- I have to be careful how I judge my prints...some are getting shorted of light!

That's why they are billionaires!

[Jac@stafford.net]

In my modest experience, the best is to have a well endowed collector find your image by any means, then catch onto it when they ask for a copy they could display in their home ... along with name photographers. I am addressing the European market, in particular Monaco. The outcome of my experience translates into many thousands of dollars.
.

[Paul Metcalf]

I suppose if this could actually be delineated/defined in a manner that could be copied/duplicated/replicated then we'd all be filthy rich and famous.

I'm glad it can't.

[Wayne]

Lighthouses.

[Kirk Gittings]

Hate to be the cynic...but I think that Light Guru nailed it!

It is cynical I think-at least in my personal experience FWIW. I'm the world's worst marketer (salesman) and I don't like galleries per-se. I just put my work out there in venues that come my way (mostly museum and public institution venues) and let the images sell themselves.......or not. I figured out decades ago that if I had to really hard sell myself, I'd rather do something else. Same in my commercial business. I haven't made a cold call of any kind in maybe 25 years and never did it much. Yet I have made a living at this since 78 and this year print sales will make up half my income for the first time. I'd rather put the time I would put into marketing into my image making instead.

As is typical with these discussions I have received a couple of emails asking about my experience so I will go into it publicly and save some time.

Maybe I have been lucky, but I think it is more just hard persistent work with a small dash of creativity and good timing. In the late 80's I had a great idea, photographing Chaco Canyon when it was not well known but on the cusp of archaeological super-stardom (I knew some of the archaeologists who were on the verge of groundbreaking research). That one project seems to have established some critical success that opened a lot of doors subsequently in the Fine Art and photo education and that project also raised my commercial profile with my main clientele-architects.

I have never figured out whether my personal photographic journey has any greater lessons for anyone else in the photographic community except in the most general of terms. Here are a few. Do projects you absolutely love and are driven to finish. If they don't keep you awake at night they are probably not going to mean much in the long run. Be your own harshest critic. Finish your projects. Diversify but specialize. I do FA B&W landscape and architecture, commercial architectural photography and editorial and teach at two universities. They all interact very well though sometimes it is like working two full time jobs. Get really good at some genre (and people will think you can do anything) but think broadly about how that expertise in a genre can have "other" lives. I started out to become a FA photographer but couldn't make a living at it and thought "what else can I do with this 4x5 to make a living" which led me into architectural photography. But I didn't give up on the FA. I also wanted to teach so I got an MFA. Each one of these avenues were an expansion of my original desires. I didn't drop one to do another and the synergy fed all. I could go on but maybe that will help someone. Contact me if you want.

Its tough out there to be an artist. It always was. I know. I was there. Anyone who makes a living in the arts in any fashion at any level has beat enormous odds.

[Willie]

A buyer with money who wants the image.

There is no magic formula.

[Two23]

Acknowledging the wealth of knowledge that reside here at this site, I would like to pose the question of “what makes a photograph sellable?” Before responding please state your area of interest such as portraits, landscapes, urbanscapes, and anything else that I have missed. This will help us better understand your responses.

I'm pretty much a "general" shooter, but especially like to photo scenes from the Northern Plains, particularly railroads/trains. That said, what makes a photo saleable? I would have to say having Kim Kardashian (or one of her related parasites) in the image is the secret. Just think of how saleable a photo of Kim Kardashian made by Peter Lik would be!


Kent in SD

[John Layton]

Kirk - thank you for the reality check. Indeed, most of my print sales over the past year involved folks who purchased my work because it struck some personal chord with them. They loved the work, and simply had to have it! I love these folks!

But I think my most satisfaction comes from selling to folks who truly appreciate a bit of “educating” prior to their making a purchase. These are folks who want to know more…sometimes about specific tools and techniques, sometimes about my own visual/mental/spiritual process as I work, and sometimes even about my personal values as they relate to my chosen field. Then again, even as an educator, I often find myself needing to cut these conversations short, because, ultimately, its more about the work than about the talk!

My occasional cynicism stems from those (thankfully few) cases where a potential buyer needs to be “sold” on a piece - those who, for example, might seek reassurances about aspects such as the work’s potential to increase in value over time, and/or its (potential) degree of “importance” in a canonical sense. To these folks I can offer no such guarantee or pretense - and only suggest that their decision to purchase be based, first and foremost, on their true liking and appreciation of the work itself.

This has been more of a “process” response I guess. I’ll need ponder the original question a bit more to see if I can add anything more specific.

[Kirk Gittings]

Good points John. Photo collectors, casual or serious, IME are buying a piece by the artist as well as a piece of the artist. So the backstory is important and I love that part of it. I get totally stoked talking about the why where when how history of an image and my enthusiasm can be contagious to the buyer. Maybe in that respect I am "selling", but it is totally genuine and heartfelt-not a sales pitch.

[Drew Wiley]

Read some Clarence King or John Muir first. Then you can tell them how you walked barefoot in the snow for three weeks and fended off a grizzly bear with the
spikes on your Ries tripod, and had to eat ants for twenty days to get that special picture. It wouldn't be terribly far off from some of my own outdoor escapades
with a view camera, although I generally need to defend myself from mosquitoes in the mountains rather than bears, and find the Ries handy for swatting away
nettles from the path. Or you can try lines like Fatali, and claim that you waited twenty days at a particular spot in order to get that special lighting event where the same crescent moon happened to appear in exactly the same spot in the sky as sixteen other prints you are selling. I have no idea what Peter Lik does, other
than serving LSD tablets to kindergartners so they can colorize his images in Photoshop; but I wouldn't tell any prospective customers that.