The Online Photographer

Check out our new site at www.theonlinephotographer.com!

Wednesday, December 06, 2006

Feedback on Print Offers

I'd like to ask for your opinion, if you'd be so kind as to indulge me.

As you've noticed, over the past couple of days I've offered a few prints for sale here. The first was a sample of B&W output from the printer I'm currently reviewing; I offered five prints and they all sold. The second was a portrait of a famous photographer. That post has been up for barely 24 hours and 8 out of 10 have sold.

I'd like to sell more prints, my own work and others'. For me, it's fun. But I'd like to hear more about your preferences and what you'd like to see.

Do you mind seeing prints for sale here on T.O.P.? (I don't know why not, but maybe I should ask.)

Do you ever buy prints at all, or are you just not ever in the market? (If you're never in the market, please don't answer any of the rest of the questions!!)

Did you consider either of the previous offers? If so, and you decided against it, how come?

Would you buy a print just to see it, or to keep it in a drawer, or a box, or a book, or would it have to be something you'd want to frame and put on the wall in order for you to buy it? Do you already have original photographs framed and hanging on your walls?

Price perception is always a headache. Consider these two comments from yesterday (I'm paraphrasing in both cases): "Sixty dollars is nothing. I just assume it can't be worth anything if the price is that low." "You said 'extremely low price.' For an inkjet? You should have said 'extremely high price.' " I know it's hard to put aside our natural inclination to seek out a good deal, but please try as you asnwer this: in general, what's the range of prices you'd personally consider paying for a print? What's just out of the question, and is it on the low or the high side?

And assuming a rough equation of price to quality, what has more appeal to you, a higher price or a lower one? That is, would you rather pay $30 for a pretty good print or $300 for a really good one?

How important are fine materials? How about a signature?

What's most important to you—a "name" photographer, the subject of the picture, or whether you personally really like the picture or not?

What would you most like to see here: prints by me, by others, or both?

Would you rather see and consider a variety of things, or do the things that appeal to you all tend to be of the same general type, style, or subject? If the latter, what sort of thing is it?

Finally, is this sort of thing—being presented with print offers / purchase opportunities, I mean—fun and / or gratifying for you?

Don't think you have to answer all these questions to respond. Any feedback you care to provide about your personal feelings would be helpful.

Posted by: MIKE JOHNSTON

30 Comments:

Blogger Andy Frazer said...

Mike,

Here's my two cents.

I do collect photographs from other photographers. I prefer to get photographs by trading with other photographers, but I am more than willing to buy prints from someone like yourself or the owners of other blogs that I read regularly. I do this because I want to support great resources such as TOLP.

I think you should occasionally offer prints for sale of your best work. I think you would do best to offer them in two levels of pricing: reasonable (for people like me) and expensive (for die-hard collectors). Even the reasonable print should be inexpensive enough to appeal to large number of customers, but good enough that it's worth collecting. To keep the cost down, the less expensive offering could use less expensive paper, or it could just be smaller.

Brooks Jensen makes a strong case for keeping the cost at or below $20. I think you could go to $30 or $40 and still get a lot of interest from your readers.

Andy Frazer

11:20 AM  
Blogger fivetonsflax said...

I haven't bought prints in the past, but I do enjoy seeing the offers, and I wouldn't rule out the possibility of making a purchase in the future. I don't think $60 is a crazy price for a print, inkjet or wet.

11:21 AM  
Blogger Bas Scheffers said...

I have always wanted to buy more original photography, in my case for hanging on a wall; a changing collection would be nice and I would certainly lend to friends what I can't fit. A photograph in a box is no good!

Unfortunately I never had the space for it.

Fortunately, that will change next year with a relocation to down under and my wife and I have already started to buy some work here in London to take with us. I would certainly consider ordering from TOP!

I care only for the subject, who created it doesn't bother me, let alone a signature. In fact, rather not; I think it distracts from the image.

I think $60 is a fair price, but certainly willing to pay more for photographs that move me.

I do love a good fiber print, which I am willing to pay for. I don't know too much about inkjets, so can't comment.

11:29 AM  
Blogger jw52tx said...

Yes, I considered the offer as I do buy prints. I thought the prices were very reasonable but do prefer to have the prints signed by the photographer.And I would expect that the print, whether an ink-jet, silver print, or other be of the best quality the photographer is capable and on fine quality stock that you could expect a reasonably long life from. We have prints framed and on our walls, in folios, and just laying around. We like photography! Its not the photographer, its the image. No doubt we collect, but not for a name---- for the images. As for the two images you offered, they just didn't sing out BUY ME, for me at least. Keep them coming though, however, whoever, how much YOU WANT TO! its your blogspot Mike, you do a great job with the content and need to keep in mind, until and if you start charging..... its YOUR BLOG and its FREE! and again you do a great job with it!

11:36 AM  
Blogger OBSRVR said...

As a photojournalist, I'm quite interested in buying, framing and hanging quality prints. Also as a photojournalist, I'm quite cash-constrained. Though your prices seem *quite* reasonable. Signatures always a plus, since images routinely achieve more fame than their unfairly obscure creators. I believe in credit.

12:03 PM  
Blogger Ken Tanaka said...

I am not a photographic collector. I do have a small library of books of photographic works and a modest collection of prints of photographs made by fellow photographers whose work I enjoy. I am also affiliated with a small group of photographic art enthusiasts, most of whom have been very serious collectors for generations. (At a recent auction this group traded approximately 160,000 of their dollars for 12 prints.) But I am not a collector and have no plans to become one.

Having that out of the way, I do occasionally buy a print. My selections are not based on anticipated appreciation but rather something much more mundane; whether or not I like the photograph. I jumped at your E.E. print because I had previously seen that image, liked it very much, and greatly admire the subject's work.

Regarding signatures, per my previous comments, their existence does not influence my purchase. I do, however, feel that photographers should sign their work and admit that a print without a signature always feels incomplete.

I do think you should look for opportunities to sell prints, Mike. I wouldn't want TOP to become an aggressive storefront but an occasional print offering is a pleasant event.

12:42 PM  
Blogger The Shooter said...

Mike,

I've bought only a handful of prints in my life, so maybe my opinion is out in left field. But I'll give it to you anyway; it's worth just what you paid for it.

Sixty bucks is pretty cheap for a limited-edition print -- unless your idea of "limited edition" is 5000.

Which brings up the next answer: I prefer to buy traditional prints rather than inkjets. Yes, I know we're in the age of digital, and I shoot with pixels and make inkjet prints myself, but when it comes to laying down cash, I want a "real" print. Maybe it's because I can convince myself the photographer, or printer, imbued the product with his/her personality through tactile association, rather than simply fiddling with Photoshop. (I am ready for the flaming, so go ahead, everybody.)

Every print I've bought in 55 years of life has been maritime-related: boats, seascapes, lighthouses, old salts, etc. Prints are a subset of my collecting maritime stuff.

Do I mind you selling prints on TOP? Hey, it's your blog.

Best,

Mike Smith

12:45 PM  
Blogger Yuda said...

Do you mind seeing prints for sale here on T.O.P.?

Not at all.

Do you ever buy prints at all, or are you just not ever in the market?

Occasionally, but it's a pretty rare thing for me.

Did you consider either of the previous offers? If so, and you decided against it, how come?

I did. Ultimately, I felt like, since both prints were limited, and I liked but didn't love them, I'd leave them for others.

Would you buy a print just to see it, or to keep it in a drawer, or a box, or a book, or would it have to be something you'd want to frame and put on the wall in order for you to buy it?

In most cases, it would have to be something I'd want to hang. The exception is an inkjet sample from a review unit.

Do you already have original photographs framed and hanging on your walls?

Only my own, but I *do* want to change that.

In general, what's the range of prices you'd personally consider paying for a print? What's just out of the question, and is it on the low or the high side?

Tough one. I'd say more than $250 is too high for me, but the sweet spot is probably going to be in the $100 range. That said, $50-60 is a reasonable price as well (it certainly doesn't seem "too cheap" to me), and as long as you're adequately compensating yourself at that level, I say open the floodgates.

I remember talking to an elderly photographer around D.C. and Baltimore (I forget the gentleman's name, sadly), who long refused to limit the number of prints he'd sell. This killed their value as collectibles, but made them accessable to a much broader range of people because he could afford to sell them for less. It might be interesting to throw some of the prints open to this degree.

How important are fine materials?

Any prints I buy, I'm going to want some confidence that they'll last longer than a year or two. I'm not interested in shoddy inkjet inks that will fade away in 18 months.

What's most important to you—a "name" photographer, the subject of the picture, or whether you personally really like the picture or not?

Don't care about the name. Subject and personal taste will control purchase decisions.

What would you most like to see here: prints by me, by others, or both?

Preferably, both.

Would you rather see and consider a variety of things, or do the things that appeal to you all tend to be of the same general type, style, or subject? If the latter, what sort of thing is it?

Variety is good.

Finally, is this sort of thing—being presented with print offers / purchase opportunities, I mean—fun and / or gratifying for you?

Absolutely. I won't buy every print that's offered (obviously), but I enjoy looking just at the jpegs of them even when I don't like it enough to buy.

1:12 PM  
Blogger wendell said...

Mike,

My feedback will not be of much relevence to your request, but thought I would reply anyway. I would love to hold in my hands a black and white inkjet print from a good file, made by someone who is accomplished, just so that I can see what quality can be achieved. I have never been able to make a good black and white print from an inkjet. Seeing a good quality B&W print may motivate me to buy the right printer and going through the necessary learning curve.
Having said this, once I look at the print, I would have no more use for it. I am an admirer of, but am neither a collector nor a displayer of fine art prints, so to pay $40 or $50 for a peek would be a little too extravagent for me.

1:21 PM  
Blogger Robert-Paul said...

Do you mind seeing prints for sale here on T.O.P.? (I don't know why not, but maybe I should ask.)

- Nope.

Do you ever buy prints at all, or are you just not ever in the market? (If you're never in the market, please don't answer any of the rest of the questions!!)

- Occasionally. I’d really like to build my collection.

Did you consider either of the previous offers? If so, and you decided against it, how come?

- Yes, but didn’t buy either. The Erwitt portrait is nice, but doesn’t interest me all that much. I was more interested in your print, but not enough to buy it I guess.

Would you buy a print just to see it, or to keep it in a drawer, or a box, or a book, or would it have to be something you’d want to frame and put on the wall in order for you to buy it? Do you already have original photographs framed and hanging on your walls?

- I’d only buy it to frame and hang.

Price perception is always a headache. Consider these two comments from yesterday (I’m paraphrasing in both cases): “Sixty dollars is nothing. I just assume it can’t be worth anything if the price is that low.” “You said ‘extremely low price.’ For an inkjet? You should have said ‘extremely high price.’ “ I know it’s hard to put aside our natural inclination to seek out a good deal, but please try as you asnwer this: in general, what’s the range of prices you’d personally consider paying for a print? What’s just out of the question, and is it on the low or the high side?

- $60 seems very reasonable to me. I’d spend up to ~$200 on an inkjet, and up to $1000 on a better quality print.

And assuming a rough equation of price to quality, what has more appeal to you, a higher price or a lower one? That is, would you rather pay $30 for a pretty good print or $300 for a really good one?

- I can’t really answer that. All depends on the prints.

How important are fine materials? How about a signature?

- Materials are important, but not a deal breaker. I don’t really care about a signature unless I’m spending a lot on an “investment.”

What’s most important to you—a “name” photographer, the subject of the picture, or whether you personally really like the picture or not?

- Whether I like it.

What would you most like to see here: prints by me, by others, or both?

- Both. (in fact, maybe readers could email their photos to you, and you could pick 5 photos a week or something to offer for sale. The people you choose could send you 5-10 prints and you could sell them. (taking a small cut for yourself of course.) That would be kind of fun.)

Would you rather see and consider a variety of things, or do the things that appeal to you all tend to be of the same general type, style, or subject? If the latter, what sort of thing is it?

- A variety. I like environmental portraits, somewhat abstract landscapes and macro shots, and street photos the most, but I’m also open to other stuff.

Finally, is this sort of thing—being presented with print offers / purchase opportunities, I mean—fun and / or gratifying for you?

- Yes. As I said, I’d like to build a collection, and this is a fun way to do it.

1:48 PM  
Blogger Del Bomberger said...

Well, I think you have hit on something. As new pro printers come to market, I am always curious to see "real" output, and I'm equally interested in seeing it on a paper that I am interested in. I have repeatedly asked for paper samples from companies of photos that include people and they always arrive without people in them.

I am willing to pay to have an actual sample in my hand of a particular printer's output on a paper in which I'm interested.

I would also buy photos in a wide price range but not often over 100 bucks. It could be less as an unsigned sample, or more as a signed print. I would most likely buy "official" collectible prints from a gallery.

I hope you continue to investigate this as a resource to keep the site afloat.

2:07 PM  
Blogger Svein-Frode said...

If it's a print I like I'm always interested...

I don't care about name, just about the personal appeal of the image. I'm rarely interested in prints of people. It just feels too strange to have somebody I don't know depicted on my walls...

Anything under $100 is a steal! Any image smaller than Letter/A4 is too small for my taste. I don't like to study images with my nose.

2:14 PM  
Blogger Nick Meertens said...

I'm relatively new to photography and the first print I considered buying was a picture you had for sale on Ebay. The one that also is on the cover of The Empirical Photographer. At the time I couldn't afford it so I didn't buy it, but it got me thinking... Actually the print of Elliott Erwitt is the first photo I have ever bought, but it wont be the last. I do occasionally trade a photo as well.

A print I buy would be something to put on the wall, changing them every now and then should the collection get larger then my walls.

Pricing is difficult and depends a lot on the picture and the wallet of the buyer. There certainly is something to say for affordable art and $60 for the last one I would say is a good price.

I can see a signed photograph being more expensive as well as one using high quality materials. Most important for me is whether I like the picture. I would never buy a picture I don't like looking at.

Concluding I can say I like your initiative to offer prints for sale, both your own and from others.

PS. Did you ever sell that print from the on Ebay or is it still for sale?

2:51 PM  
Blogger Mike Johnston said...

Nick,
That's my personal all-time favorite picture of my own. I may have another (extra) copy of it somewhere but I would need to search.

Maybe I will offer that one as an inkjet.

--Mike

3:01 PM  
Blogger Nick Meertens said...

Mike,

If you do find another copy of it somewhere or offer a print here on TOP I will not miss the opportunity again, you can put me on the list for the first print... It is such a wonderful photo!

Best, Nick

3:15 PM  
Blogger robert e said...

I don't mind that prints are occasionally offered for sale on your blog. It feels right. Anyway, I come here partly to see what you'll do next as you feel your way through this medium/activity.

$60 is cheap for a piece of fine art, and expensive for just a good photo. I don't know enough to say whether an excellent inkjet print is worth less than an excellent darkroom print on comparable paper. Having dabbled in both darkroom and inkjet, it seems to me that making fine prints in either context requires skill, effort, time, materials and equipment. Either way, I'd pay significantly more for a desirable photo on good fiber paper than the same photo on RC paper.

I haven't yet had the money to buy fine photographic prints. For now, I settle for postcard reproductions, books, and making my own. I very well might buy a modestly priced print if it really knocked my socks off, or if it was highly regarded and it interested me, and I'd hang it.

So at the moment my bar is both quite high and narrow, perhaps even unrealistic, and while both prints you've offered are good photographs, neither made the cut.

Just about everything you mentioned counts toward value: aesthetics, materials, signature, reputation, origin; also consider that prints can be, and often are, collaborations.

Isn't photography peculiarly a medium where the 2,054th edition of a work can be better and worth more than the first or second edition, for any number of reasons? Limiting labor- and time-intensive production runs makes sense to me. Limiting access for the sake of limiting access does not. For an exceptional photograph worth printing, I an see no reason reason why a $20 inkjet print that was run off by an assistant on acceptable paper could not be offered side-by-side with a $500 limited run master-crafted signed platinum print on fine paper. (Or more or less--my actual prices may be way off, and there are other factors as well.)

7:10 PM  
Blogger Tim said...

Mike,

I'm not interested in buying prints. I come here for photography related news. Perhaps you could make it a sidebar on the site. If posts started to be about selling prints, I'd remove TOP from my bookmarks. I'm glad you ask though, as I enjoy TOP and don't want it to go that direction.

7:20 PM  
Blogger Al Benas said...

I am trying to buy more work from photograhers that I like; money-on-hand is a major control to my spending. I think $40-$80 is a good price range for an unframed, unmatted print. I would only buy something that I can't walk away from, and that I would hang on the wall. Not to ask too much, but I want my pictures signed (it personalizes the work), of the best quality materials - use size to regulate price. And I do NOT consider inkjet prints a second string offering. Inkjet is all I do; I love the stuff. It would be like turning your nose up at a pen & ink sketch by some famous painter because it wasn't on canvas (not that I'm famous:)).

Now this may sound strange, but I didn't consider either print because I'm not in to obvious people subjects of those folks that I do not know. But I think you should only sell your own work. It would add a new level of interest to your many testing efforts and the results, therefrom, could provide an additional source of financial support for TOP. I also think that the logistics, both physical and psychological, of selecting other work would, ultimately, not be worth it.

8:18 PM  
Blogger Bill said...

I do buy prints every now and then. Keep up the offers.

8:23 PM  
Blogger JBrunner said...

1. No, I don't mind seeing offers for prints at all. Thats what photography is actually about, the print.
2 Yes, I purchase prints on a regular basis.
3 Yes, I considered one, but I decided against because I was not compelled by the image, and I seldom purchase inkjets.
4 When I purchase a photograph, it goes on the wall, or is gifted to someone who will hang it.
5 I wont pay much for an inkjet. $60 is pushing it. I would have to really like it. I have and will pay more than I can afford for real silver, or other traditional prints, sometimes over a thousand dollars.
6 materials and process are very important to me. I place a large premium that a photographer cares enough to know and apply darkroom craft. I feel a great connection to a photographer, knowing that he was intimately involved his craft, and the hand creation of the print I have. Much more than perfect identical copies being spit out of a machine,and limited edition is a crock, an artifice designed to portend rarity for the not rare. Signature and provenance are important. I want to know what I'm buying. Some photographers prefer to sign the back.
7 That the picture moves me, and the subject. Name doesn't matter so much, but I also understand that I am going to pay more for a well known photographers work.
8 I'd like to see interesting work from many different folks.
9Variety is the spice of life.
10 Bring em on!

8:33 PM  
Blogger Sean Winslow said...

While I think $60 is a fine price for a print, I can't say that I had even heard of the subject before you named him the best living American photographer, and buying it would just seem like hoarding... and if one is to hoard prints, they should at least be signed prints...

I will look him up, as I am making a point of viewing some work by all the people you posted.

Personal aesthetic appeal is what matters to me most, not the photographer (several exceptions, but I doubt we'll see affordable Ansel Adams prints on this blog). Your last print was interesting to me, but I buy little (both few and not much of my money) and generally of different styles than have been on offer.

9:37 PM  
Blogger Mike Johnston said...

Wow...never heard of Erwitt...you know, I envy you. You have so much great stuff waiting to discover! I wish I could find an Erwitt for the first time (Juan Buhler is the closest I've come to that recently).

Check out his great book SNAPS. IT's a tour de force.

Cheers,

--Mike

9:42 PM  
Blogger Ernest Theisen said...

I buy prints from the net and I sell prints on the net. I buy prints from photographers who make images I like. I only buy images to frame and put on the wall. I am a pictorialist so I like pictorial images. Because I want to support TOP and would love to see what Mike considers a high quality ink jet print, if I liked the image I would pay $50 or $60 for a signed 5x7. I think offering prints on TOP is a fine idea. Go for it! E

9:46 PM  
Blogger John said...

"Do you mind seeing prints for sale here on T.O.P.? "
I don't mind.

I have bought prints, but never online. I'm not sure I would buy a print without seeing the actual print first. Pictures on monitors are not prints!

"Did you consider either of the previous offers?"
I considered buying the print made on the HP B9180, not because I liked the picture, but because I'm printer shopping.

Moving on:
I have original framed prints hanging and can see seven of them from where I'm sitting. With that in mind, I wouldn't purchase a print that is not already mounted because I think that's the photographer's responsibility. I can supply an over-mat if necessary. A print isn't finished until it's been mounted and signed either on the photographs border or the mount, in my opinion. Which leads into "fine materials". I assume if a print is being sold, it's on a reasonable material. Because it's already mounted, the weight and textile quality of the paper are unimportant. I chuckle when I see some people going on about how wonderful some paper feels when handled. The only way I want to feel a photograph is emotionally. And I also have some prints in boxes.

"That is, would you rather pay $30 for a pretty good print or $300 for a really good one?"
That's a loaded question! I've seen really good prints for $30 and worse than pretty good prints for $300.

Because I'm not interested in buying for investment purposes, and only buy what I like, the name of the photographer is not a consideration. I have prints by both "name" and no-name – well, the prints do have a name on them ;-) – photographers and enjoy them equally.

9:48 PM  
Blogger stephen best said...

You seem to have tapped an outlet for your own work and a great potential earner for the site, so go for it! Personally, I think a permanent sidebar is best (something like "Print of the Month") rather than embedding the editorial with what would be essentially advertisement.

I don't know whether I'd be tempted to buy anything though, unless it struck a particular chord.

For those with a preference for traditional over inkjet prints, maybe they just need to look at some fine samples of the art. Technology has come a long way and there's some very fine rag papers now available. Even in the days of the darkroom, people printed on silver, platinum/palladium, POP, albumen or whatever. You have to give some credit to the artist knowing whether their own image is enhanced or compromised by the medium.

10:51 PM  
Blogger Dafu said...

Do you mind seeing prints for sale here on T.O.P.?
Not in the least! But . . . I think I would prefer them to be occasional--in the same style as the rest of the posts. If you did a separate, linked site for images that would be nice, too.

Do you ever buy prints at all
Yes.

Did you consider either of the previous offers? If so, and you decided against it, how come?
No grabba-da-eyes.

Would you buy a print . . .?
I would buy a print to put it on the wall. Then, after a while, it might go in a box or stay on the wall or be put in a book.

Price perception
Difficult. I think inkjets should be lower because they're infinitely reproduceable--click "Print." Traditional production is more dicey: weak stop bath etc. and therefore high quality is more rare. I saw an Ansel Adams 3'x4' silver gelatin print yesterday that was certainly worth thousands both from provenance as well as quality. A truly good inkjet is hard to do but it ain't the same. So the non-answer to your question is anywhere from $40 to $500 is in my range but I can see where more is reasonable.

And assuming a rough equation of price to quality . . .
Anything over $150 and I'd have to see the print itself.

. . . How about a signature?
Prints should last. I used to be more blasé about signatures. I'm not now. Sign your work.

What's most important to you
The picture and my affinity for it.

What would you most like to see here: prints by me, by others, or both?
Whatever. You've got good taste.

Dave

10:54 PM  
Blogger godtfred said...

Do you mind seeing prints for sale...
No, but not so much that it turns into an online mini-gallery... (but that was never going to be the case anyway...)

Do you ever buy prints at all...
Sometimes, but as a photographer I hang a lot of my own stuff on the walls ;)

Did you consider either of the previous offers...
Considered both and acted on one.

Would you buy a print just to see it, or to keep it in a drawer, or a box, or a book, or would it have to be something you'd want to frame and put on the wall...
It would be for hanging on the wall, I'm not a fan of photo albums, portfolio boxes, and other storage methods.

Price perception is always a headache...
Personally I think a print should be priced from a combintation of the following factors: Manufacturing cost, size, originality of subject/depiction and number of prints to be made available. Artist may come into play, but not so ofthen in my case.

And assuming a rough equation of price to quality, what has more appeal to you...
I find myself attracted to the highest quality of workmanship as much as the content. For example I judge table-top books and magazines as much on their binding, paper, wheight and layout, as on their content.

How important are fine materials? How about a signature...
Signature is important for future value and originality purposes, but not neccesarily on the front, but rather on the back and in the corner of the frontside print. This will keep the signature in place and prevent it from showing/bleeding through in any important part of the picture, while the owner is free to frame the picture as he or she wishes.

What would you most like to see here: prints by me, by others, or both...
Prints that you personally think are good enough to sell, no matter who has taken them. I visit the T.O.P. for the insightful comments, humourous notes, news related stories, and future predictions (among other...) and would value to see what you think are good prints.

Would you rather see and consider a variety of things, or do the things that appeal to you all tend to be of the same general type, style, or subject? If the latter, what sort of thing is it...
I'm a great fan of black and white "head and shoulder" portraiture, but that's just me...

Finally, is this sort of thing—being presented with print offers / purchase opportunities, I mean—fun and / or gratifying for you...
As long as it is not too much, I would browse galleries much more if it was prints Im after.

4:10 AM  
Blogger dasmb said...

I've drunk the kool-aid. I firmly believe that taking a photograph means nothing unless you can produce an attractive print.

This shift into the digital darkroom means I find myself caring more about the prints others are producing. And reading about them isn't good enough -- it's one thing to hear about the great results printer X has with paper Y through program Z, and quite another to actually see them.

Thus, I am interested in purchasing prints, especially ones that have similar style and coloration to my own work. The two you've had for sale recently don't meet this standard, but if you keep it up I guarantee I'll buy one, provided the price is under $50. As a student of photography I don't have the budget of a long time appreciater, but I believe that there will be prints in and out of my range.

What do I want to see prints of? Well, interesting things from good photographers, known or unknown.
I'm partial to surreal landscapes, urban scenes and available light photography. I've only been making shots for about two years and am completely uneducated with regard to photographic history. Feel free to take advantage of my ignorance.

9:29 AM  
Blogger Sean Winslow said...

"Wow...never heard of Erwitt...you know, I envy you."

My photographic education is eccentric, almost entirely self-taught, and focuses on landscapes more than documentary. I had a Pentax-clone SLR as a child, and had not read anything about photography other than the Ansel Adams books until four years ago, when I needed a serious hobby to keep me from going mad in graduate school. So photography and cooking keep me sane (and perpetually behind schedule).

It also turns out I spoke too soon--Erwin has just one photo in the Magnum Israel 50 book, which I recently purchased and have been spending time with.

Perhaps you can offer 'ten foundational books that every photographer should read,' 'ten books of llandscapes,' and 'ten books of documentary and portrait photograhy' as a few of your upcoming lists of ten, for the incompletely educated like myself.

12:33 PM  
Blogger Eric said...

I'd love to see what you offer for sale.

I'm a big fan of buying prints directly from photographers. Direct selling over the web allows photographers to sell small, personal prints, the kind of things that might not sell in other contexts.

10:23 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home