One of the most frequently asked questions by those that are interested in selling photos is “What are my photos worth?” Pricing is always a challenge. One thing is certain… price varies depending on the type of sale you’re pursuing (stock, fine art, etc.) and a variety of cascading options. For fine art photography the process is a subjective one based on your interpretation of the market, unless you’re work is being featured at auction where buyers clearly set market value. I’m no pricing expert, but for myself I tend to look at my peers and stay in touch with the general trends in the market place.
Funny thing is that fine art pricing usually leaves photographers scratching their head when they hear news of high priced sales. I had this type of moment recently when I found out that the highest price for a photo by a living artist reached $3.3 million dollars this past February 7th. What was this photograph of and who was it by?
It was by a relatively unknown photographer by the name of Andreas Gursky. His diptych photo of the interior of a 99 Cent store aptly titled “99 cent II, Diptych” was the image of someones desire.
The First $3M Photograph – American Photo
More information on Andreas Gursky via Wikipedia
Even though 3M seems excessive I would like to mention that Gursky is actually fairly well known for his gigantic color photos.
What’s more interesting is the fact that Richard Prince’s Cowboy sold for 1M. He took a photo of a Marlboro advertisement. Sure there is a concept behind it (what does authorship mean in a time where everything can be reproduced easily?), but he doesn’t even consider himself a photographer.
When you look at these prices for photos you must look at them in the context of all art. Prince and Gursky both see themselves first as artists, with a message, and their medium just happens to be photography. Chuck Close is another example for this. He did some photography, but he also painted. So this photography is very different from e.g. Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, etc. who really embrace photography for its mnemonic qualities.
Once you look at these photos as art as such, the price is easier to understand: In today’s world a lot of art is seen as another type of investment. It doesn’t matter what’s depicted. All that matters is whether the artist is “hot” or not and whether the price will rise. The result is that the visual aspects (or the lack thereof) is often ignored for the easy-to-understand concept and that the price has little to do with the actual quality of the work.
All of which is a pity.
Oskar you make a great point. Thanks for the comment. Now to become a “hot” artist 🙂
So very well put, it is the way of the world money!I am a photographer and i have a total passion for what i am trying to portray but it is no good having this without the cash to fund it.I once had some dealings with an auction house one of the well known ones, an item was coming up for sale for £800,000-£1,000,000 this seamed a lot of money, two months later i saw the same chap and he informed me this item had sold for a little over £2,000,000. To me this proves a point the item may only have been worth £1,000,000 but two people wanted it, so to own it the cost was double. the value of something is what someone is prepared to pay! Are my pictures hot or not? Please let me know. http://www.cubaporcuba.com Many thanks Rupert.
Gursky is a relatively unkown photographer?!?!!? On flickr? In the blogosphere?
Get yourself a passport, dude!
I hope you noticed this post was made in 2007. He’s become much more well known since. Thanks for adding a comment.