Insurance value of photos?

[poco]

I'll soon be delivering 70+ prints to a gallery for a show coming up next spring. One of the things they'll also need is a list of shots with insurance value and I don't know what the convention is for this -- is it like the IRS artists donation rule where only material costs count? Or should it be for "market value" ...whatever that may be for someone who's never sold a print? The prints are all inkjet 8x10s printed on 13x19 paper and I was just thinking of throwing a $50 value on each for a total $3500 of insurance value, but who knows?

Any ideas?

-Michael

[Andrew_4548]

Don't know about any official rates but here in the UK I've sorted out an exhibition of work from nationwide photographers and that had an insurance value of approx. 50 gbp per image including the frame and 150 prints so roughly 7500 gbp ~ $15000. All of these are nominally on 20x16 mounts.

Assuming there isn't a claim, I suppose the gallery just requires this for their insurance paperwork or do you need to contribute to a premium? This may have a bearing on how much you value them depending upon how you can afford...

Andrew

[poco]

Thanks, Andrew. They'll cover the premium, but there's no point in inflating that cost for them.

I'll be talking to the gallery owners about it, but would still like to know if there's any "standard practice" here in the US -- or worse yet, rules of some sort.

[Greg Lockrey]

Here in Michigan you can insure them for whatever you like as long as you don't mind paying the rate. It's smart to just insure them for actual replacement costs only.

[claudiocambon]

I would say their book value (ie, gallery price), not just the replacement value.

Think of it this way. A distributor makes and sells canned tomatoes. Canned tomatoes get destroyed in shipment. If he is insured, it is on the sale value, not merely his cost to can the tomatoes.

I beleive it is this way for any good, and artwork should be the same.

[Ash]

If the print is from digital, there is less effort involved in replacement, as you are paying more for materials. If the prints are traditional there is the extra factor of hours in a darkroom getting the perfect print. So I guess in your shoes I would place digital prints at cost, and traditionals at cost, plus a basic rate for how many hours extra work went into producing them.

[poco]

Thanks guys.

My $50/each idea would split the difference between materials and presumed market value price -- heck, the frames alone are worth $20.00. I'll go with $50.00 as a starting point and see what the gallery director says.

Thinking about it, I doubt we're talking a separate policy for the show anyway, so I should probably go market value and hope for disaster:p

[Jim Noel]

For an inkjet print I believe the cost of the frame, matting, ink and paper is all that is justifiable.

[Greg Lockrey]

I would say their book value (ie, gallery price), not just the replacement value.

Think of it this way. A distributor makes and sells canned tomatoes. Canned tomatoes get destroyed in shipment. If he is insured, it is on the sale value, not merely his cost to can the tomatoes.

I beleive it is this way for any good, and artwork should be the same.

The profit on a can of tomatoes is about 3% , are you saying that should also be the limit for artwork?

[claudiocambon]

The profit on a can of tomatoes is about 3% , are you saying that should also be the limit for artwork?

No, simply that the replacement value should be the sale value, not merely the cost of making it. That's what any other manufacturer insures their goods for. How much profit margin lies therein is a different matter.

[jb7]

The profit on a can of tomatoes is about 3%

Apples and Oranges, really, when you put it like that-

j

[mikebarger]

I doubt many manufacturers, that are of any size, insure their products at all. The numbers generally just don't add up. The actual risk doesn't amount to much compared to volume manufactured.

Even the tomato guy, shipping 15 trailers a day (standard 53 foot variety), unless he is losing a lot of trailers I'm sure he isn't going to insure his product.

Sorry, to be off topic.

Mike

PS Haven't read about to many tomato hijackings here in the Midwest ;)

[Martin D.]

What is the price of a photo that didnt sell yet? My guess would be that if a photo does not have a well established market value, the insurance company would only refund replacement costs.

[domenico Foschi]

I would definetly insure them for the resale value.