Briot's Confession

[Greg Lockrey]

I'm getting a kick out of this thread, one huckster calling another a "huckster". I haven't met a professional photographer yet that didn't do at least a little huckstering. It's those poor "starving artists" I worry about.

[Marko]

I'm getting a kick out of this thread, one huckster calling another a "huckster". I haven't met a professional photographer yet that didn't do at least a little huckstering. It's those poor "starving artists" I worry about.

I wouldn't worry about those either - it's all about natural selection, you know. They either start hustling to put the food on the table or they select themselves out of the picture, if you'll pardon the pun. Personally, I'd be more inclined to ridicule the latter than the former.

[Greg Lockrey]

You mean, an artist has to "prostitute" his work too?

[Marko]

It's the huckster aspect of the website that especially riles me. At the end, I asked a kind of Thoreauvian question which limits choice for the sake of clarity.

But why??? Why be so harsh on the fellow that tries to make for a living and does it pretty honestly, as far as I can tell.

It's his site, he's not peddling his wares here on the forum, as some of us do, more or less often... I understand that you may not like what he has to say and sell, but then again, you visited his site, not the other way around.

Speaking of Thoreauvian questions, I notice that you don't have a site of your own listed here. Perhaps you'd like to demonstrate your point by personal example?

Marko,

You misunderstand me completely. I was referring to his photographs. I don't know how he speaks. I speak with an accent. My use of the word was a figure of speech.

Well, I don't know how he speaks either, but I assumed that you read his site in order to criticize him. Allan is originally from France. He says that in the opening sentence of his Biography.

But even as a figure of speech it doesn't score any points, IMO. It's one of those ugly little ad hominems people resort to when they run out of real arguments.

[Michael Alpert]

Greg (and Marko),

If you reread my previous post, you will see that I was referring to the language on Alain Briot's website. I don't know him personally and would not characterize him as a huckster. (Broad terms like huckster and artist, starving or otherwise, mean little or nothing, especially when referring to a stranger.) Given that this is a forum of ideas, I think it is fair for me to speak against that website's rhetorical devices. Anyway, I have nothing more to say about this topic. Good luck.

[Kirk Gittings]

Michael,
I understand. My point, I guess. For many years, doing my art on the side, I made my living doing other things than with photography, having bought into the late sixties belief about keeping your art "pure". I was a welder, an auto mechanic, a union organizer etc. While I had some critical success with my photography, I did not make much money from it. It was a huge struggle to even find the time energy or resources to do it. So I decided, against my art school programing, horror of horrors, to try commercial work. That was 1978, 29 years ago. Ironically it is just as hard to find the time, will, et. to do my personal work now, because of the demands of a reasonably successful photo business. There is so much mythology about the life of an artists. It is so hard to make a living doing art photography without doing workshops writing, teaching etc. and being a huckster. I personally have to respect some artists marketing skills even if it is over the top and their artwork is not my cup of tea, because there are two sides to this profession and most people could use to learn a trick or too about selling yourself. It is just another skill to learn and use. Even Weston did every crappy portrait he could to pay the bills and buy some film and paper.

On the other hand I used to know a reasonably successful sculptor who introduced himself as Hi I'm, Blah Blah, The Famous Sculptor. No kidding.

[Marko]

You mean, an artist has to "prostitute" his work.

Well, they have to do something to buy the food and pay the rent, don't they?

Or perhaps they should do what all the big artists, mostly painters and sculptors, did throughout history - find a rich sugar daddy to support their visions in return for the family portrait or two?

[Michael Alpert]

Kirk,

I certainly agree with what you just wrote. Sometimes aggressive "over the top" rhetoric strikes me as manipulative, and I react strongly to it. But I think I've said more than enough about this subject and want to let it drop.

[Duane Polcou]

I've worked for many years in marketing, and rare is the occasion when an exaggeration or outright lie does not accompany the context of sales pitch. This on the outset seems unethical, but competition can be so fierce between product lines that doing and saying outlandish things to gain an edge becomes the norm. And yes, if you are in business, a "portfolio" of photography is a product line and a "gallery" is a retail outlet. There is a reason why top logo and slogan designers get paid obscene
fees, because in a sliver of a moment they can stimulate the subliminal sense of immediate desire, even need. So you reach for your plastic. The moral? I don't have one. I photograph models for Skinemax DVD box art (some of them on 4x5!!) and spend up to 15 hours in Photoshop on one image to make college boys reach for their plastic. How is that for false advertising?
So Alain, my only complaint is that instead of "millions" you should have said "billions".

[artedetimo]

This on the outset seems unethical, but competition can be so fierce between product lines that doing and saying outlandish things to gain an edge becomes the norm.

Doesn't mean its not unethical; just that everyone who wishes to compete must be. Survival trumps ethics, so people convince themselves that its a matter of survival.

I would say that the notion of the power of advertising is a little overblown. Yes customers have to know you're there for anything to happen in the first place, but the jump to making you "need" something takes a whole lot of Freudian manipulation of already existent tendencies than one marking person or even firm can accomplish.

Its funny because every marketing person I have met and dealt with (too many) seem to think that they as individuals have that ability to manipulate people into needing things. But when you see them in action its silly, almost laughable, that they think they can be so effective with the see through gimmicks and ploys they come up with. The manipulation that makes us NEED to have the 16 Mpix DSLR over the 8 is the endless onslaught of a whole society dependent on consumption as a form of survival. I think deep down we know that modern society depends on consumption so we are more likely to give in since it IS what makes our world go round.

For those with disposable income, buying that less than stellar print gives the guy a job so the buyer is a little less finicky about departing with the money, especially when it was so easy to "earn" it in the first place.