Virtue – The Difference Between Open Edition & Limited Edition Prints.
I don’t know my art history as well as I probably should. I’ve spent the better part of the hour trying to search online for examples of artists who produced work specifically to pay the bills. I know these artists existed, but after plugging in all manner and combination of search terms I’ve come up empty handed. The Internet has become a quagmire of useless information when trying to find specific information. Sure there is a lot of valuable and entertaining information available, but finding it when you don’t already know of it’s existence has become a futile effort.
I wanted to provide some real life examples of artists who produced paintings, or works of arts, designed to be readily and easily marketed which would give them the means to pay the bills, while still allowing them to work on greater, more meaningful or personal pieces. The only reference I could find was to Claude Monet’s early charcoal sketches which he sold cheaply.
How many artists have two different lines of work available at vastly different price options? We’ve all seen modern day artists who have their original painting and then knock off thousands of reproductions. First there is the limited edition, signed reproduction. When that sells out there might be a few Artist’s Proofs sold at considerably higher prices than the limited edition reproductions. Finally there are the open edition reproductions – the posters, the cards, and the merchandise all produced at a very low prices which allow anyone to enjoy the imagery.
Those that have purchased the much higher priced limited editions know they have bought a collectible piece of art which is likely to appreciate in value, depending on the career and popularity of the artist. Those that have bought the open edition print have a nice image to display in their home. The difference is between home decor and an investment.
As an artist, I am continually trying to weigh the pros and cons of producing both limited edition and open edition prints; and especially what the future consequences of selling a line of open edition prints would have on the future of my career.
The costs involved in producing limited edition prints for the galleries are quite different from that involved in simply selling a print online, which would explain why there are such huge price differences. For the limited edition there is a need to track every print created and the details surrounding it. A spreadsheet or database program is usually required. Where the print is located (gallery, exhibition, or home studio), who it is sold to, and other factors need to be tracked.
There is framing to be done, which in addition to the cost of framing materials, involves labor. Then there are transportation costs to cover. Exhibitions outside the artists geographic area will involve crating and transportation fees. Insurance on the work is required. There are advertising and promotional costs.
When an exhibition takes place there are more expenses. Postcards are usually printed, sometimes advertisements are placed with local or national media, and receptions usually involve refreshments. Often these costs will be incurred by the gallery, but sometimes the artist will be hosting their own exhibition.
If work is shown in a gallery, regardless of whether it is an artist-run, public or commercial gallery, there will usually be staff to pay, plus expenses related to the gallery space – the lease or mortgage on the building. These fees need to come out of the commission charged by the gallery. Pricing on original art, and limited edition prints needs to be able to absorb all these costs, plus have room for a profit margin, which is often so small artists barely have enough to pay for supplies to keep creating new works.
If an artist is selling an open edition print themselves the costs involved in producing and marketing that print are very small compared with the limited edition print. There is no need to track the prints, there are no exhibition fees to take into account. It is the costs and time involved in producing the print, and the costs to advertise and ship the print; which are usually dramatically lower than advertising and transportation of gallery prints.
If an artist produces both open edition and limited edition prints, but keeps the imagery completely different, what affect would that have on their career? How does that impact the consumer, the gallery, and especially the value of their limited edition prints?
In: Art · Tagged with: Artists, limited edition art, open edition art, prints
on March 1, 2010 at 4:59 am
Permalink
We all agree on the definition of “limited edition” prints, however, I think there are different ways of using the term “open edition.” You are speaking of “open edition” in a very broad way, as any photograph that is un-numbered and actually not an edition of any kind at all. In my experience and based on the many high level dealers and professional photographers I have talked to about it, there is another type of “open edition,” that is a numbered series, but has no limit as to the number of prints in the edition. Strictly speaking prints that are not numbered at all, under this second edition, would not be “open edition” or an edition of any kind. By using my father as an example, some may say I am an unabashed self-promoter, but hopefully this will be helpful to the discussion and clarification. My dad, master landscape photographer Philip Hyde, made a portfolio one time that was a numbered limited edition of 50. Generally otherwise he never numbered any of his prints, but he did keep good records of exactly how many prints were made of each image. He usually made only 2-6 prints of each and moved on, even with his very best, most widely published images. This leaves us in an interesting quandary today. The best prints are all gone. Fortunately before he passed on, Dad had Carr Clifton print five archival pigment digital prints for him that Dad signed. Carr Clifton is still making prints of Dad’s top photographs. What may be of interest as a possible model for you and your fellow photographer readers is that we are doing what is called an “open edition,” each print is numbered, the number of prints has no limit, but the prints go up in value every time we sell 10 prints of all sizes. When the 10th print is sold, the price goes up $100 in all sizes. This requires much more paperwork than a straight limited edition. It also gives the earlier print numbers not only a higher perceived value, but a higher true value and investment potential. The gentleman above said that Ansel Adams did not do limited editions, and this may be true by the end of his life, but he did experiment with both limited and open editions. I had the Director of Mountain Light when Galen Rowell was still around, do some consulting for me. I am surprised at what you say about your galleries insisting on limited editions because it is not customary for photography. In fact in this day many people consider limited editions in digital processes to be somewhat of a myth. Here’s why: My friend from the old Mountain Light said that they would offer a limited edition of 250 prints of a certain photograph in 11X14 size. After the 11X14 size was sold out, they would print a limited edition of 250 prints in the 12X16 size, and so on. You can see why people are skeptical of limited edition digital prints, as they are much easier to make. Ansel Adams is the one who originally tried this practice for a time. I am not sure if this is what they do at Mountain Light any more, but they do sell both limited edition and open edition prints today, and both varieties are numbered. All of this said, there are a few photographers, such as Carr Clifton himself, who offers a limited edition of 50 or 75 prints IN ALL SIZES, that is, only 75 prints sold total in all sizes. This sort of limited edition might be recognized, but the industry does not particularly support the higher prices charged as a result, partly because it has already discounted the rarity of limited edition digital prints, as compared to dye transfer, Cibachrome or silver prints. I did ask well-known appraiser and Black and White Magazine columnist Lorraine Davis some of these same questions and I will be doing a post in the future on her advice on this. Now that I have written a marathon reply that I never thought would be so long, I hope it helps.
on March 1, 2010 at 3:28 pm
Permalink
All valid points you make. I started out doing editioned prints – that is numbered prints without a set limit, but it was the gallery I was dealing with that asked for a number limit. There are so many arguments for each scenario that it has to ultimately rest with the artist what the best method is for them. One thing I know for sure is that I hate the sized editions; and that is not something I’d ever do. An edition for me is about the image, not what size. If I buy a print in an edition of 50 I want there to be 50 prints period, not 50 at this size and 50 at that size, and oh….wait….here’s another 50 at this other size. To me those are the activities that start to make the validity of limited editions come into question. So when I say an edition of 30 that’s it. There’s 30 prints made period – doesn’t matter what media it’s printed on or the size.
on February 28, 2010 at 8:40 pm
Permalink
I’ve resisted doing limited editions for a long time. I believe that at its heart, photography has always an open edition artform: for example, Ansel Adams never made limited editions. Besides, every year, my skills and the technology improve, allowing me to coax more art our of my old photographs, making them better and better. A limited edition would technically prevent me from achieving this change.
on March 2, 2010 at 2:24 am
Permalink
I get you on the skills and being able to rework images. My take on this is that I’ve retired the older version and given the new version a designation that it’s a different version in the title. For example: Litmus Sky#2 represents a different color cast on one of my more popular images. The real version is pink, the #2 version is altered to be blue.
on February 24, 2010 at 11:07 pm
Permalink
A good post about a very tough subject!
I gave up a few years ago on doing limited edition prints. From your description, it seems to me that the issue isn’t limited or unlimited but rather whether the work is handled through a gallery (other than the tracking issue, which I don’t believe is that challenging). All the costs you mention are very real (framing, publicity, staffing, shipping, etc) but seem to be independent of the edition issue.
Some galleries may only accept limited edition prints but I know some are open to unlimited either instead or in addition.
I’m not a big fan of limited editions – to me they seem a bit artificial, especially when printing has improved to the point where repeatability is not a big issue. Again, I’m basing this on the cost factors not being a direct result of the limited or unlimited issue. I guess I’ve reconciled myself to never becoming famous enough as an artist to be truly collectible or an investment.
I’ve also been reluctant to create 2 different pricing tiers to avoid competing with myself. Many people just want the image and don’t care about quality, so they’ll buy the very inexpensive version.
I think the only thing we can be sure of is there is no clear best way. Pricing and marketing strategies are just hard, and in the art world harder still because it’s so difficult to treat art as a commodity.
on February 24, 2010 at 11:34 pm
Permalink
I went to look for your prices but couldn’t find them. However, judging by the printing prices you must be charging a fair and decent price for your prints. I was reluctant to do limited editions too, but the galleries I’m with all insisted upon it. While the tracking of information isn’t difficult per se, it does require an additional element of time and software. (Yes, I could do it the old fashioned way in a book and avoid the need for a computer program, however the program is useful for other aspects of the art business.) I’m not sure I agree that it’s difficult to treat art as a commodity. I was just introduced to a pricing formula commonly used in some European countries where the work is priced according to size. The length + width are multiplied by a cost factor depending on the stage of an artist’s career. A new artist coming out of art school starts at a 6.