Art Discussion.
I found this article on twitter by artist friends posting their kudos: http://www.somersherwood.com/?p=126
I replied saying I disagree, but with twitter I can't really fully express why. So I'm whining about my opinion here, because I think it's worth writing out.
The article mentions a lady at a craft fair saying the hats weren't good and weren't worth $150. It then goes on to prove this lady is wrong because the materials cost whatever amount, and the hours it took to make the hat equate to an hourly wage that is less than minimum wage.
The message I got from this was that the price of art, or any product for that matter, should reflect only the cost of materials and the time it took to make them. Which I 100% disagree with.
I am not disagreeing that some people have no respect for the value of art. I am not saying that these particular hats are not worth $150. All I am saying is that you cannot determine the price of a product based on the cost of creating it.
Examples. There are many products out there that people willingly pay WAY more than cost for. A pot of tim hortons coffee costs 10 cents to make, and they sell that pot for about $8. Many brand name clothes, purses, perfumes, and the like are super expensive, not because the customer is paying for the cost of creating that product, but because the customer is paying for the VALUE they assign to the product.
Why do people buy $3000 brand name purses instead of buying a $100 one? What is the difference? There is a barely (if at all) noticeable difference in quality between these, however people are still willing to pay $3000 for one and not the other. Did the $3000 purse cost any more to make than the $100 one? Nope. So what are people paying extra for? The value. Whatever that is.
What determines value then? There are many, MANY considerations besides the product itself. Maybe the company that creates the product has great customer service, gives to charity, and has green practises. Maybe buying the item gives you other benefits. Having a $3000 is a status symbol, shows off a certain lifestyle, or represents more to you than just a bag.
Price is driven by value which is determined by the customer. This is marketing 101.
Now, specifically to art. In 2009 I was putting sculptures on ebay starting at 99 cents and they were selling for, on average, $40. Did they take me more than 4 hours to make? Yes. $40 hardly covered my materials.
Do I spend longer on the sculptures I make now than the ones I made in 2009? Honestly, not really. So what's the difference? The time it took to make them is the same. The cost of materials is the same. Why was the value of them $40, and why is it now $200?
Because costs/hours spent has little to do with value, and therefore little to do with price.
The harsh truth is that the sculptures I was making in 2009 were anatomically inaccurate, poorly detailed, and poorly made overall. Were they total garbage? No. But with most figurative art, the anatomy makes a difference. Some human sculptures are absolutely gorgeous in every way, but have eyes slightly too close together. It won't matter how long you spent creating it, it's not good enough to sell for a decent amount of money.
Some artists have a huge following of people, and therefore get tons of commissions and money, and yet they aren't necessarily better than another artist. This artist is kind of like a "brand name", in that sense. On the other hand, some artists have amazing customer service and are super friendly, so you're going to chose to buy from them. I don't know about you, but if I was at a crafts fair and an artist was rude to me, I would not buy their product regardless of how good it was. Professionalism in general is a big factor.
Now, I understand that in some cases, the extra time spent working on an item may increase the level of detail and thereby increase the value of that art. In general I think this is true. However, it is not necessarily true, so determining price based on this alone is missing a huge part of the issue.
Not only do I create art but I purchase it as well. I AM the type of person who will save up and spend $200-$300 on a piece of art that is worth that to me. A lot of people don't value art. You have to accept that art is a niche market and that some people just don't get spending $200 on a clay horse.
The artist who makes these hats obviously has enough of a demand for them that she is selling them at $150 often enough. Perhaps the person who said they are overpriced don't value that specific type of art, or maybe they just didn't see the detail come through. Personally I wouldn't spend that much money on something like clothing or jewellery for the sake of it being handmade, but I would spent more than that on an art sculpture.
It's art. It's subjective. But the reason those hats are worth $150 is NOT that they take a long time to make. It's because customers VALUE the detail in the hats, and value the artist.
My point is, and I hope I've articulated it properly, is that the value of art, or any product, is dictated by the customers, not you. If no one is willing to pay whatever amount for your product, they won't. If the hours you put into the item, or the cost of materials you spend to create the item, directly affect the VALUE, then yes, use those to help determine price. But don't ONLY rely on those two factors. Sometimes art is "worth" much much more than the hours/costs to create it. Sometimes it's worth less.
Just because you exercise for x hours a day doesn't mean you lose x amount of weight. Just because you studied x amount of hours for the test doesn't mean you get x grade.
The other thing is, even if you don't agree that your art is too expensive, it's important to listen to everyone. I WISH someone would have told me in 2009 that my horses looked like crap and to work on anatomy and sculpting before I tried to sell them. Yeah, it would have been hurtful and I'd probably be angry, but it would have helped me. With the example from the article, the artist may use the information to help market her items. Perhaps the person looking at her stuff was just rude. But, maybe she, like me, prefers art more than crafts, or didn't enjoy that particular style of craft. She was AT a craft fair, not a walmart, so I think it's likely she was used to and prepared to buy crafts. Writing off any opinion about your stuff blocks out information that could help you.
That's all. I didn't mean to start shit on twitter.
I replied saying I disagree, but with twitter I can't really fully express why. So I'm whining about my opinion here, because I think it's worth writing out.
The article mentions a lady at a craft fair saying the hats weren't good and weren't worth $150. It then goes on to prove this lady is wrong because the materials cost whatever amount, and the hours it took to make the hat equate to an hourly wage that is less than minimum wage.
The message I got from this was that the price of art, or any product for that matter, should reflect only the cost of materials and the time it took to make them. Which I 100% disagree with.
I am not disagreeing that some people have no respect for the value of art. I am not saying that these particular hats are not worth $150. All I am saying is that you cannot determine the price of a product based on the cost of creating it.
Examples. There are many products out there that people willingly pay WAY more than cost for. A pot of tim hortons coffee costs 10 cents to make, and they sell that pot for about $8. Many brand name clothes, purses, perfumes, and the like are super expensive, not because the customer is paying for the cost of creating that product, but because the customer is paying for the VALUE they assign to the product.
Why do people buy $3000 brand name purses instead of buying a $100 one? What is the difference? There is a barely (if at all) noticeable difference in quality between these, however people are still willing to pay $3000 for one and not the other. Did the $3000 purse cost any more to make than the $100 one? Nope. So what are people paying extra for? The value. Whatever that is.
What determines value then? There are many, MANY considerations besides the product itself. Maybe the company that creates the product has great customer service, gives to charity, and has green practises. Maybe buying the item gives you other benefits. Having a $3000 is a status symbol, shows off a certain lifestyle, or represents more to you than just a bag.
Price is driven by value which is determined by the customer. This is marketing 101.
Now, specifically to art. In 2009 I was putting sculptures on ebay starting at 99 cents and they were selling for, on average, $40. Did they take me more than 4 hours to make? Yes. $40 hardly covered my materials.
Do I spend longer on the sculptures I make now than the ones I made in 2009? Honestly, not really. So what's the difference? The time it took to make them is the same. The cost of materials is the same. Why was the value of them $40, and why is it now $200?
Because costs/hours spent has little to do with value, and therefore little to do with price.
The harsh truth is that the sculptures I was making in 2009 were anatomically inaccurate, poorly detailed, and poorly made overall. Were they total garbage? No. But with most figurative art, the anatomy makes a difference. Some human sculptures are absolutely gorgeous in every way, but have eyes slightly too close together. It won't matter how long you spent creating it, it's not good enough to sell for a decent amount of money.
Some artists have a huge following of people, and therefore get tons of commissions and money, and yet they aren't necessarily better than another artist. This artist is kind of like a "brand name", in that sense. On the other hand, some artists have amazing customer service and are super friendly, so you're going to chose to buy from them. I don't know about you, but if I was at a crafts fair and an artist was rude to me, I would not buy their product regardless of how good it was. Professionalism in general is a big factor.
Now, I understand that in some cases, the extra time spent working on an item may increase the level of detail and thereby increase the value of that art. In general I think this is true. However, it is not necessarily true, so determining price based on this alone is missing a huge part of the issue.
Not only do I create art but I purchase it as well. I AM the type of person who will save up and spend $200-$300 on a piece of art that is worth that to me. A lot of people don't value art. You have to accept that art is a niche market and that some people just don't get spending $200 on a clay horse.
The artist who makes these hats obviously has enough of a demand for them that she is selling them at $150 often enough. Perhaps the person who said they are overpriced don't value that specific type of art, or maybe they just didn't see the detail come through. Personally I wouldn't spend that much money on something like clothing or jewellery for the sake of it being handmade, but I would spent more than that on an art sculpture.
It's art. It's subjective. But the reason those hats are worth $150 is NOT that they take a long time to make. It's because customers VALUE the detail in the hats, and value the artist.
My point is, and I hope I've articulated it properly, is that the value of art, or any product, is dictated by the customers, not you. If no one is willing to pay whatever amount for your product, they won't. If the hours you put into the item, or the cost of materials you spend to create the item, directly affect the VALUE, then yes, use those to help determine price. But don't ONLY rely on those two factors. Sometimes art is "worth" much much more than the hours/costs to create it. Sometimes it's worth less.
Just because you exercise for x hours a day doesn't mean you lose x amount of weight. Just because you studied x amount of hours for the test doesn't mean you get x grade.
The other thing is, even if you don't agree that your art is too expensive, it's important to listen to everyone. I WISH someone would have told me in 2009 that my horses looked like crap and to work on anatomy and sculpting before I tried to sell them. Yeah, it would have been hurtful and I'd probably be angry, but it would have helped me. With the example from the article, the artist may use the information to help market her items. Perhaps the person looking at her stuff was just rude. But, maybe she, like me, prefers art more than crafts, or didn't enjoy that particular style of craft. She was AT a craft fair, not a walmart, so I think it's likely she was used to and prepared to buy crafts. Writing off any opinion about your stuff blocks out information that could help you.
That's all. I didn't mean to start shit on twitter.