Sunday, June 11, 2006

What was in the COMMENT BOX

All right, so I opened the responses in the Comment Box.
I again, ask more people to fill these out. I know the responses so far are not representative of the people I engage with every day here at the gallery.

These questions are meant to be a fun way for people to say what they would like to say about various art topics. Pretentiousness aside, just come on down and say what you gotta say.

Describe what you like about your favorite gallery without using the words "good" or "bad".
"The most memorable experiences...is the installation itself. Are the walls clean? Is the art in a visible height for viewing?...Is the lighting appropriate? I also admire the curators sensibility and knowledge of the art and the artists."
"Ones that show visual art as opposed to cerebral art."

I think the part about the curators sensibility is what I hear most, and what seems important to me.
Although I have heard complaints about gallery cleanliness in the past by both artists and other gallerists.
Here's an article with wine at openings:
http://artnews.com/issues/article.asp?art_id=1437

Do you visit Art Fairs? What do you like about them, dislike. Which fairs have you gone to.
"If by art fair you can also associate EXPO, then yes I am extremely invigorated by them. Otherwise Art Fair as emporium is rudimently uninvigorating."

Well responder, here are some fairs I am referring to (they all call themselves fair):
artla
AAF
scope
Basel
here is an interesting article:
http://www.chicagoartistsresource.org/?q=section/840/841/761

Judging by the hand-writing, I think the same person responded to this question:
How often do you purchase art? Do you have a range you spend in, if so, what is your cut-off...Why do you make the choices you do?
"For new artists I have never purchased anything considered trite for a painting. Anything less than $300 is an insult to the artist. I believe $3000 would be my cut-off."
another response was: "6 times per year - $0-$500 - If I only knew"

I have not had a client want to pay more for art because anything lower is an insult to the artist, or they thought the low price posted was an insult. The price they felt was proportionate is what they liked paying, especially if it seemed low for their perception of the value of the piece.
I have heard from several collectors that they will spend no more than $1000 on a single substantial piece by a more well-known emerging artist. Many will pay less for emerging art and want to see even lower prices by a completely unknown artist.
Several collectors that purchase numerous pieces per year like to spend only about $200 - $500 for a single art piece at a time. Many are enjoying the rise of works on paper & produced items for under $200. Artists share with me that work should be priced higher, but they are not the majority of my clients who do spend more for art...

Do you value photography as an art form "lesser" than paintings because of editions, or perhaps it seems more instant than a painting.
"Editions don't matter to me, the image does." I value photography more than paintings because I know it well."
"An addendum: I have never bought an inkjet or giclee print and probably won't."

here is an article on photography printing.


When you leave a gallery feeling like there wasn't any good art, describe waht you saw or what about it was not good.
"Not original, or just obviously catering to trendy buyers."
"Impersonal, disonnected, replicative, mass-produced, informed by ennui without re-invigorating the questions..."
"Feeling like there was nothing new or innovative - too many "sailboat" oil paintings."

  bookstore revisited: a curated bookstore of delightful and compelling things