Lili Krakowski on wed 7 jul 10
I am not picking on anyone. And I am not advocating anything. Although =
=3D
I think Michael Wendt should refer to Mrs W by name,not just "my wife".
However. We are as secretive and "shy" about pricing as people used to =3D
be about sex.
The facts are that in the group called "potters" in this country today =3D
(It may be the same in other places, but I'm not there....) a few earn =3D
their living entirely through clay. There are far more who have some =3D
other income...whether a partner/spouse/pension/trust fund...and fudge =3D
about it all. =3D20
I know two full time potters whose wives pay the big bills. Nothing =3D
wrong with that. Both women are "professionals" doing work they chose, =3D
love, and are good at. I know several whose husbands earn a good =3D
living, and wife only pays for studio expenses.. Nothing wrong with =3D
that. A good number of potters are retired from teaching jobs....and =3D
have the pensions to show for it. Many potters teach--part or full =3D
time....and that is a big chunk of their income. Others yet--as I =3D
did---have unrelated-to-clay jobs. And on and on.
Fabienne asked the other day ( Hi there...can anyone be as super as =3D
Joyce tells us you are? ) about starting to pot full time while =3D
supporting a 2 1/2 year old and sending him to private school.
If Fabienne already had an established business, an established =3D
clientele, plus some sort of other wind at her back....one could say "Go =
=3D
for it." But this sounds like the thinnest ice possible...To start in =3D
this economic climate, with known responsibilities ahead...thin ice, =3D
thin ice.
Then there is talk about pricing. And talk and talk and talk....and NO =3D
ONE so far has said: "Listen you guys....we are up against countless =3D
potters who do not make a living, do not need to make a living, off =3D
their pots, and sell them at cloud-cuckooland prices...
Today a woman I am very fond of told me that her daughter-- a retired =3D
schoolteacher--has been going to "fairs" and "Farmers' Markets" selling =3D
jewelry she makes...and sales are great. And there are potters out there =
=3D
who do the same thing...Someone like Bonnie Hellman can do the =3D
math...but I am willing to bet that everyone of these "crafts people" =3D
undercuts those who
try to make a complete living of it.
It all is a vicious circle. When I produced more I priced my work at =3D
the "going [gallery/store ] market," I was a trained, experienced =3D
potter, I felt my pots were worth more than what newbies and the like =3D
were asking....and fortunately I had a great "gallery" and soon, a =3D
following. But did I support myself at clay? No. Period. No.
I have stopped making much pottery, and when I do I generally =3D
barter...Barter has a built in fairness I truly like. =3D20
But we all are up against very unfair competition. No, not evil =3D
intentions, just an unrealistic approach. We have newbies proudly =3D
tell us they fell in love with clay at some recreational class, have =3D
been potting just a year and already are selling at local fairs etc. We =
=3D
have had people who do the clay equivalent of painting-by-the-numbers =3D
and boast of their sales.
We have--as a group--provided "training wheels" for dozens and dozens of =
=3D
beginners and hobbyists....and our "reward" has been undercutting of the =
=3D
professional market.
I am not blaming or accusing or condemning or judging anyone. I only am =
=3D
saying that a very real aspect of "la condition potiere" is being =3D
ignored, even when we discuss it.
We are the professional registered dog breeders who must compete against =
=3D
those who breed a purebred bitch once a year to pay for her vet =3D
bills....Right.=3D20
Why not discuss that?
Lili Krakowski
Be of good courage
Patty on wed 7 jul 10
I'm often asked "do you sell your pots?" No, I do not sell my pots. In th=
e
past I have sold at student sales and remember one teacher (full time
potter) telling us to raise the prices on our mugs and we did.
I don't need to sell my pots and I do not want to compete with those who
need to live off pottery. I take candy in a bowl or cup or flowers in a
vase as a hostess gift. People look at me as if I am crazy for not selling
my pots. Am I crazy?
Patty Kaliher
Elisabeth Maurland on wed 7 jul 10
I am one of those full-time potters with no other income other than my
husband's, who is also a potter and makes less than I do. So I don't
have time to write much. I also have a 5-year-old to raise, who will
most definitely not be going to any private school.
Lili, you are touching on something I've been thinking about lately. I
really can't work any harder (over 50 hours a week, year round), and
we can't live any more frugally, but we're not making ends meet.
It just seems that potters "can't" charge as much for their works as
others do. Granted, our materials are cheaper than many (but not all),
but because there is so much lower-priced pottery out there, there is
a limit to what people are willing to spend on a mug. I decorate all
my pieces in much detail, so my mugs are $55 a piece now, and are
selling at that, but if I were to actually make a living, they would
have to be double, I think.
So I've been secretly wishing that all potters got together and agreed
to raise our prices together. I'm not holding my breath, so I'm
looking into other ways to make money on my designs. And eventually, I
might stop making pots too.
Elisabeth
On Jul 7, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Lili Krakowski wrote:
> I am not picking on anyone. And I am not advocating anything.
> Although I think Michael Wendt should refer to Mrs W by name,not
> just "my wife".
>
> However. We are as secretive and "shy" about pricing as people used
> to be about sex.
>
> The facts are that in the group called "potters" in this country
> today (It may be the same in other places, but I'm not there....) a
> few earn their living entirely through clay. There are far more
> who have some other income...whether a partner/spouse/pension/trust
> fund...and fudge about it all.
>
> I know two full time potters whose wives pay the big bills. Nothing
> wrong with that. Both women are "professionals" doing work they
> chose, love, and are good at. I know several whose husbands earn
> a good living, and wife only pays for studio expenses.. Nothing
> wrong with that. A good number of potters are retired from teaching
> jobs....and have the pensions to show for it. Many potters teach--
> part or full time....and that is a big chunk of their income.
> Others yet--as I did---have unrelated-to-clay jobs. And on and on.
>
> Fabienne asked the other day ( Hi there...can anyone be as super as
> Joyce tells us you are? ) about starting to pot full time while
> supporting a 2 1/2 year old and sending him to private school.
> If Fabienne already had an established business, an established
> clientele, plus some sort of other wind at her back....one could say
> "Go for it." But this sounds like the thinnest ice possible...To
> start in this economic climate, with known responsibilities
> ahead...thin ice, thin ice.
>
> Then there is talk about pricing. And talk and talk and talk....and
> NO ONE so far has said: "Listen you guys....we are up against
> countless potters who do not make a living, do not need to make a
> living, off their pots, and sell them at cloud-cuckooland prices...
>
> Today a woman I am very fond of told me that her daughter-- a
> retired schoolteacher--has been going to "fairs" and "Farmers'
> Markets" selling jewelry she makes...and sales are great. And there
> are potters out there who do the same thing...Someone like Bonnie
> Hellman can do the math...but I am willing to bet that everyone of
> these "crafts people" undercuts those who
> try to make a complete living of it.
>
> It all is a vicious circle. When I produced more I priced my work
> at the "going [gallery/store ] market," I was a trained,
> experienced potter, I felt my pots were worth more than what
> newbies and the like were asking....and fortunately I had a great
> "gallery" and soon, a following. But did I support myself at
> clay? No. Period. No.
>
> I have stopped making much pottery, and when I do I generally
> barter...Barter has a built in fairness I truly like.
>
> But we all are up against very unfair competition. No, not evil
> intentions, just an unrealistic approach. We have newbies
> proudly tell us they fell in love with clay at some recreational
> class, have been potting just a year and already are selling at
> local fairs etc. We have had people who do the clay equivalent of
> painting-by-the-numbers and boast of their sales.
> We have--as a group--provided "training wheels" for dozens and
> dozens of beginners and hobbyists....and our "reward" has been
> undercutting of the professional market.
>
> I am not blaming or accusing or condemning or judging anyone. I
> only am saying that a very real aspect of "la condition potiere" is
> being ignored, even when we discuss it.
> We are the professional registered dog breeders who must compete
> against those who breed a purebred bitch once a year to pay for
> her vet bills....Right.
>
> Why not discuss that?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lili Krakowski
> Be of good courage
Lis Allison on thu 8 jul 10
On July 7, 2010, you wrote:
>
>..... The facts are that in the group called "potters" in this country
today
> (It may be the same in other places, but I'm not there....) a few
> earn their living entirely through clay. There are far more who have
> some other income...whether a partner/spouse/pension/trust fund...and
> fudge about it all.
OK, Lili, you've described the problem nicely. But what do you suggest as
a solution? And please, I'd like a solution that allows for entry-level
potters to actually enter. I'm not one now, but was.
Cheers,
Lis
--
Elisabeth Allison
Pine Ridge Studio
website: www.pine-ridge.ca
Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Daniel Rotblatt on thu 8 jul 10
Chris,
I'm not advocating making or selling in competition with Wal-martesque
stores. What I'm saying is that the perception of the public is
swayed by the prices of ceramics that are mass produced. Even if they
intellectually know the difference between hand made and mass
production work, they are subconsciously influenced by the bombardment
of low cost cheap (in all senses) ceramics. It's ridiculous to try to
compete with mass production doing hand work.
Dan
On Jul 8, 2010, at 8:16 PM, Dana & Chris Trabka wrote:
> Dan,
>
> I agree that there is a lot of low priced potters out there.
> However, if you are producing work that looks like it came from "wal-
> mart", is priced for the "wal-mart" customer, then you are competing
> with "wal-mart" not the customer who appreciates and understands the
> considerations in making a fine hand crafted form. As an artist you
> must decide who is your customer, what do they expect, what does it
> take to meet their expectations, and does the cost of producing the
> product that meets the customer's expectations and satisfy your
> costs and fees for producing that product. If a $5.00 bowl provides
> a potter enough profit and satisfies their customer's expectations;
> who should argue.
>
> I know of potters that charge $5.00 for a bowl. That is their
> choice, not mine.
>
> Chris
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Rotblatt" NET
> >
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 1:14 PM
> Subject: Re: Pricing. Can we talk?
>
>
>> Lili,
>>
>> You've got some excellent points. I don't sell my pottery, I'm a
>> sculptor in bronze and stone selling fine art and perhaps my take on
>> this my be of interest. It is of course my own opinions.
>>
>> How to make sales is always a consideration to all of us. For me
>> there are several factors, but the perception of the buyer is of
>> primary importance. When I started to make sculpture I thought about
>> what material to use. Ceramics was one choice, but I realized that
>> when people looked at a piece of stone or bronze sculpture, they
>> perceived it as something of higher value. At least in the case of
>> my sculpture, clay is a malleable substance, easy (at least in the
>> perception of the public) to form into any shape. In their opinion,
>> we just shape it and stick it in a kiln. Bronze or stone have an
>> automatic "Wow" factor in just how they are formed which adds to its
>> mystic and value. Further, they have an association with "fine art"
>> while, i'm sorry to say, ceramics does not. This is not a critique
>> on either medium as art, just an observation on what I have seen in
>> public perception.
>>
>> Even so, I don't think the primary issue is one of craft vs. fine
>> art. More, I think that the perception of pottery is undercut by
>> mass produced ceramics. A mug at a K-mart is $4 - I'm sure the ones
>> that you make are far superior in looks, but for functionality the $4
>> one probably works just as well. You have to compete with that
>> perception, and it just can't be done. Most people look at your mug
>> and don't realize the time and effort that went into it. They don't
>> realize the difference in work between hand work vs. factory mass
>> production. Those that do, or are attracted to the concept of hand-
>> made, may buy it if they like it. Personally, I think that mass
>> production is the primary factor in undercutting handmade ceramics
>> prices - like so many things in the modern world. It's like Wall
>> Marts putting the little business out of business.
>>
>> There is also the factor of how the work is marketed. Face it, I'm
>> not going to sell any $4-5,000 sculptures at a fair or swap meet.
>> I'm going to sell it through a gallery. If you are selling at a
>> farmers market, your price point has to be one that will attract
>> someone for an impulse buy. High end ceramics (meaning over couple
>> of hundred per piece) is going to sell the same way as fine art -
>> through a gallery. People going to fairs and farmers markets are
>> there to relax, maybe to pick up a memory - they're not going to
>> spend huge sums of money on a whim (generally not over $100). In a
>> gallery, at least a good one, the gallery owner will be putting
>> buyers/collectors together with the artwork (which is how they earn
>> their commission). Lastly, fine art or ceramics at this level all
>> have some special quality. One of them is that they are unique, or
>> at least limited editions. People spending this kind of money want
>> that.
>>
>> Anyway, that's my two cents. I don't know any solutions, it's a hard
>> fact of life. Reality is, as long as people will make and sell
>> pottery for low prices, then that will set the price. If I've
>> stepped on any toes, I apologize - but it's just my opinions and
>> observations of how things seem to work, not my philosophy or
>> beliefs. If I had my way, all artists would be revered and paid
>> commensurate to their skills and creativity. The thread struck me
>> since it is something I am very focused on right now - the economy
>> being what it is.
>>
>> Dan Rotblatt
>> www.RotblattSculpture.com
>>
>>
>> On Jul 7, 2010, at 2:24 PM, Lili Krakowski wrote:
Daniel Rotblatt on thu 8 jul 10
Elisabeth,
Agreed, there are other venues to sell work then galleries. I'm
curious about the $11,000 dress though - did you, or anybody else buy
it. I never hesitate to put an expensive piece in a venue were I
don't think it will sell - as long as I have items at the $500-1000
mark. People often look at that, love it, and then purchase an item
of lesser cost. It makes the lower priced things seem like a
bargain. Once again, it is perceived value by the customer. Hell,
what can I say, I'm a sculptor - I deal in illusions.
I do hope the perception is changing, and I agree that the economy is
a huge factor in sales right now.
Dan
On Jul 8, 2010, at 2:10 PM, Elisabeth Maurland wrote:
> Dan,
>
> I think you're right about the perceived value of clay. Also, there
> is still the perception of potters as hippies, dirty, ragged, dirt
> poor and loving it.
>
> But you don't have to only sell high-end work through galleries.
> High-end art fairs are another venue where people will spend
> hundreds and thousands of dollars on a piece, such as a bronze
> sculpture. There are many of those in the country, both indoor and
> outdoor. I guess you would classify my work as high-end pottery, but
> I only sell at fine art and craft fairs, since I can't afford the
> commission that galleries take, nor can I sell my work at wholesale
> prices.
> (At one indoor show I did this year, I saw a dress that Ii liked.
> Price tag: $11,000.)
>
> At shows, I dress up and act professionally, as do most of the art
> fair artists I know, so to at least part of the public, the
> perception might be changing. Just not fast enough. The economy
> isn't helping either.
>
> Elisabeth
>
>
> On Jul 8, 2010, at 12:14 PM, Daniel Rotblatt wrote:
>
>> Lili,
>>
>> You've got some excellent points. I don't sell my pottery, I'm a
>> sculptor in bronze and stone selling fine art and perhaps my take on
>> this my be of interest. It is of course my own opinions.
>>
>> How to make sales is always a consideration to all of us. For me
>> there are several factors, but the perception of the buyer is of
>> primary importance. When I started to make sculpture I thought about
>> what material to use. Ceramics was one choice, but I realized that
>> when people looked at a piece of stone or bronze sculpture, they
>> perceived it as something of higher value. At least in the case of
>> my sculpture, clay is a malleable substance, easy (at least in the
>> perception of the public) to form into any shape. In their opinion,
>> we just shape it and stick it in a kiln. Bronze or stone have an
>> automatic "Wow" factor in just how they are formed which adds to its
>> mystic and value. Further, they have an association with "fine art"
>> while, i'm sorry to say, ceramics does not. This is not a critique
>> on either medium as art, just an observation on what I have seen in
>> public perception.
>>
>> Even so, I don't think the primary issue is one of craft vs. fine
>> art. More, I think that the perception of pottery is undercut by
>> mass produced ceramics. A mug at a K-mart is $4 - I'm sure the ones
>> that you make are far superior in looks, but for functionality the $4
>> one probably works just as well. You have to compete with that
>> perception, and it just can't be done. Most people look at your mug
>> and don't realize the time and effort that went into it. They don't
>> realize the difference in work between hand work vs. factory mass
>> production. Those that do, or are attracted to the concept of hand-
>> made, may buy it if they like it. Personally, I think that mass
>> production is the primary factor in undercutting handmade ceramics
>> prices - like so many things in the modern world. It's like Wall
>> Marts putting the little business out of business.
>>
>> There is also the factor of how the work is marketed. Face it, I'm
>> not going to sell any $4-5,000 sculptures at a fair or swap meet.
>> I'm going to sell it through a gallery. If you are selling at a
>> farmers market, your price point has to be one that will attract
>> someone for an impulse buy. High end ceramics (meaning over couple
>> of hundred per piece) is going to sell the same way as fine art -
>> through a gallery. People going to fairs and farmers markets are
>> there to relax, maybe to pick up a memory - they're not going to
>> spend huge sums of money on a whim (generally not over $100). In a
>> gallery, at least a good one, the gallery owner will be putting
>> buyers/collectors together with the artwork (which is how they earn
>> their commission). Lastly, fine art or ceramics at this level all
>> have some special quality. One of them is that they are unique, or
>> at least limited editions. People spending this kind of money want
>> that.
>>
>> Anyway, that's my two cents. I don't know any solutions, it's a hard
>> fact of life. Reality is, as long as people will make and sell
>> pottery for low prices, then that will set the price. If I've
>> stepped on any toes, I apologize - but it's just my opinions and
>> observations of how things seem to work, not my philosophy or
>> beliefs. If I had my way, all artists would be revered and paid
>> commensurate to their skills and creativity. The thread struck me
>> since it is something I am very focused on right now - the economy
>> being what it is.
>>
>> Dan Rotblatt
>> www.RotblattSculpture.com
Daniel Rotblatt on thu 8 jul 10
Lili,
You've got some excellent points. I don't sell my pottery, I'm a
sculptor in bronze and stone selling fine art and perhaps my take on
this my be of interest. It is of course my own opinions.
How to make sales is always a consideration to all of us. For me
there are several factors, but the perception of the buyer is of
primary importance. When I started to make sculpture I thought about
what material to use. Ceramics was one choice, but I realized that
when people looked at a piece of stone or bronze sculpture, they
perceived it as something of higher value. At least in the case of
my sculpture, clay is a malleable substance, easy (at least in the
perception of the public) to form into any shape. In their opinion,
we just shape it and stick it in a kiln. Bronze or stone have an
automatic "Wow" factor in just how they are formed which adds to its
mystic and value. Further, they have an association with "fine art"
while, i'm sorry to say, ceramics does not. This is not a critique
on either medium as art, just an observation on what I have seen in
public perception.
Even so, I don't think the primary issue is one of craft vs. fine
art. More, I think that the perception of pottery is undercut by
mass produced ceramics. A mug at a K-mart is $4 - I'm sure the ones
that you make are far superior in looks, but for functionality the $4
one probably works just as well. You have to compete with that
perception, and it just can't be done. Most people look at your mug
and don't realize the time and effort that went into it. They don't
realize the difference in work between hand work vs. factory mass
production. Those that do, or are attracted to the concept of hand-
made, may buy it if they like it. Personally, I think that mass
production is the primary factor in undercutting handmade ceramics
prices - like so many things in the modern world. It's like Wall
Marts putting the little business out of business.
There is also the factor of how the work is marketed. Face it, I'm
not going to sell any $4-5,000 sculptures at a fair or swap meet.
I'm going to sell it through a gallery. If you are selling at a
farmers market, your price point has to be one that will attract
someone for an impulse buy. High end ceramics (meaning over couple
of hundred per piece) is going to sell the same way as fine art -
through a gallery. People going to fairs and farmers markets are
there to relax, maybe to pick up a memory - they're not going to
spend huge sums of money on a whim (generally not over $100). In a
gallery, at least a good one, the gallery owner will be putting
buyers/collectors together with the artwork (which is how they earn
their commission). Lastly, fine art or ceramics at this level all
have some special quality. One of them is that they are unique, or
at least limited editions. People spending this kind of money want
that.
Anyway, that's my two cents. I don't know any solutions, it's a hard
fact of life. Reality is, as long as people will make and sell
pottery for low prices, then that will set the price. If I've
stepped on any toes, I apologize - but it's just my opinions and
observations of how things seem to work, not my philosophy or
beliefs. If I had my way, all artists would be revered and paid
commensurate to their skills and creativity. The thread struck me
since it is something I am very focused on right now - the economy
being what it is.
Dan Rotblatt
www.RotblattSculpture.com
On Jul 7, 2010, at 2:24 PM, Lili Krakowski wrote:
> I am not picking on anyone. And I am not advocating anything.
> Although I think Michael Wendt should refer to Mrs W by name,not
> just "my wife".
>
> However. We are as secretive and "shy" about pricing as people
> used to be about sex.
>
> The facts are that in the group called "potters" in this country
> today (It may be the same in other places, but I'm not there....)
> a few earn their living entirely through clay. There are far more
> who have some other income...whether a partner/spouse/pension/trust
> fund...and fudge about it all.
>
> I know two full time potters whose wives pay the big bills.
> Nothing wrong with that. Both women are "professionals" doing work
> they chose, love, and are good at. I know several whose
> husbands earn a good living, and wife only pays for studio
> expenses.. Nothing wrong with that. A good number of potters are
> retired from teaching jobs....and have the pensions to show for
> it. Many potters teach--part or full time....and that is a big
> chunk of their income. Others yet--as I did---have unrelated-to-
> clay jobs. And on and on.
>
> Fabienne asked the other day ( Hi there...can anyone be as super
> as Joyce tells us you are? ) about starting to pot full time while
> supporting a 2 1/2 year old and sending him to private school.
> If Fabienne already had an established business, an established
> clientele, plus some sort of other wind at her back....one could
> say "Go for it." But this sounds like the thinnest ice
> possible...To start in this economic climate, with known
> responsibilities ahead...thin ice, thin ice.
>
> Then there is talk about pricing. And talk and talk and
> talk....and NO ONE so far has said: "Listen you guys....we are up
> against countless potters who do not make a living, do not need to
> make a living, off their pots, and sell them at cloud-cuckooland
> prices...
>
> Today a woman I am very fond of told me that her daughter-- a
> retired schoolteacher--has been going to "fairs" and "Farmers'
> Markets" selling jewelry she makes...and sales are great. And there
> are potters out there who do the same thing...Someone like Bonnie
> Hellman can do the math...but I am willing to bet that everyone of
> these "crafts people" undercuts those who
> try to make a complete living of it.
>
> It all is a vicious circle. When I produced more I priced my work
> at the "going [gallery/store ] market," I was a trained,
> experienced potter, I felt my pots were worth more than what
> newbies and the like were asking....and fortunately I had a great
> "gallery" and soon, a following. But did I support myself at
> clay? No. Period. No.
>
> I have stopped making much pottery, and when I do I generally
> barter...Barter has a built in fairness I truly like.
>
> But we all are up against very unfair competition. No, not evil
> intentions, just an unrealistic approach. We have newbies
> proudly tell us they fell in love with clay at some recreational
> class, have been potting just a year and already are selling at
> local fairs etc. We have had people who do the clay equivalent of
> painting-by-the-numbers and boast of their sales.
> We have--as a group--provided "training wheels" for dozens and
> dozens of beginners and hobbyists....and our "reward" has been
> undercutting of the professional market.
>
> I am not blaming or accusing or condemning or judging anyone. I
> only am saying that a very real aspect of "la condition potiere" is
> being ignored, even when we discuss it.
> We are the professional registered dog breeders who must compete
> against those who breed a purebred bitch once a year to pay for
> her vet bills....Right.
>
> Why not discuss that?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lili Krakowski
> Be of good courage
Larry Kruzan on thu 8 jul 10
Lili my love - do you ever know how to stir the pot!
I walk a line (or try to) between art and function with an occasional
intersection at production street. So far I'm doing ok but the past two
years have been a little tight - some has been due to my health and some du=
e
to the economic scene. Although I try to make a living from pots, it has
just been too rough here in corn country to make the math work. So for the
past couple years we have been supplementing things from the previous good
times.
A few years ago I was selling pots faster than I could produce them so I
made some good investments. Now those investments allow me to have a little
breathing room. I'm careful - very careful about how I spend those funds
because I don't know how soon I can replace them. Since I'm 55 the chance o=
f
starting all over is not attractive, but it would not be the first time I'v=
e
taken a swing at the ball and missed.
How do I handle a beginner undercutting my prices? I don't worry about it.
I'm located in a farming community with a population of 1700. Located
halfway between Chicago and StLouis (150 miles each way) I do draw some
clients from both but the walkin trade is all local. My last apprentice
liked the area so much that she set up shop here. She undercuts my prices
with every pot she sells. She has her things in a local winery where she
works and a restaurant across the street from my shop. I wish her well,
she's a hard working kid.
So of my local friends and customers have asked me how it was working out,
some have worried that two might be one too many. So far she makes a few
bucks and I make a few. Hopefully the customers can see the difference.
Perhaps she might someday want to buy a gallery of her own and I'll retire =
-
again.
Or someday I'll decide it's time to pull the plug and more my studio home
but not yet. As it is right now, I'm healing from my surgery and the Doc
says 4 more weeks - but I plan to have the gallery open in the morning,
perhaps I'll sell a mug or two and pay for the lights. If not, I'll open on
Saturday morning - or maybe I'll go fishing...........
Larry Kruzan
Lost Creek Pottery
www.lostcreekpottery.com
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.15390)
http://www.pctools.com/
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Snail Scott on thu 8 jul 10
On Jul 7, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Lili Krakowski wrote:
> ... few earn their living entirely through clay...
As a sculptor, I have at various points in my career
earned money from sales equal to my entire income
in other years. Never in the same year, though... ;)
At my peak of sales, I made decent money. Not enough
to save much, or have insurance, but I lived debt-free.
Right at that time,though, my main gallery fell under
new management, and the new director's experience
was solely in gift-shop retail. She packed the walls and
pedestals like a discount store, and sales plummeted.
She asked me for more low-end work ("Cheaper work,
OK? and less weird, maybe? Tone it down a bit.") I had
way too many of my eggs in that particular basket at the
time, so I went along with the suggestions.
Result? My worst years ever. The biggest lesson I took
away from that gallery debacle (in addition to not
committing too strongly to any outlet, even a good one)
is that there is simply too much competition in aiming
toward the average.
I don't claim to know what 'people' want. People come
in all sorts, and want many different things. I have
learned what people don't want, though.
They don't want the ordinary. Unless it's cheap.
Even in sculpture this is an issue: make nice garden
statuary in a classical style, and you will be undercut
by cast-concrete imports. The upper-level collectors
won't touch it at any price, but even an above-average
discerning art aficionado will often say, 'Hey, it's only
$35, let's get it."
Same with pottery. What does your work offer that can't
be had from a Wal-Mart dinnerware set: four full place
settings - a dozen pieces - for $25. They look pretty
dang nice, too, and fashionable. and if the kids break
some, well, easy come, easy go.
An awful lot of potters declare that the handmade-ness
of their work is attraction enough. Well, it seems to me
that while some folks think so, most don't think it's a
sufficient attraction to warrant the extra money it costs
to get handmade. Compared with the manufactured
options, what are you offering that's worth ten times the
price?
The folks that seek handmade for its own sake are not
enough to support every potter trying to make a living,
much less everyone making pottery! Even those buyers
are not a locked-in clientele, because you are competing
with every other potter, pro and amateur. If all the buyer
wants is handmade, mediocre will suffice as long as it's
cheap enough: it's handmade, ain't it? And price matters.
They aren't likely to buy a $50 plate, they are just trying
their best to avoid Wal-Mart. A four-person dinner set by
a top-level production potter would cost more than my first
car. For these folks - often well-intentioned but of limited
means (or limited connoisseurship) - amateur will suffice.
Amateurs' prices will not keep a full-time professional
fed, though. In spite of that, many full-time professionals
(or would-be full-timers) make mediocre work. Not
necessarily inferior quality, but boring, ordinary, frumpy,
unfashionable, seen-it-before. Average.
Un-special.
Potters with highly refined craftsmanship too often stop
there, making work which is all but indistinguishable from
the stuff at Wal-Mart. If it can't be distinguished, and only
a limited pool of buyers will pay a living wage to you for
its handmade-ness, then why should anyone else bother?
If you are making it because it pleases you as the maker,
well, dandy, but that makes you quite literally an amateur.
Nothing wrong with amateurism, but if you wanna make
a living, you need to take a hard look at your product.
Cost-cutting and hard work are good, but if people don't
want it at a price that supports you, you need to make a
living elseways, or do some product development.
Most people have had the good sense to give up hand-
throwing plain terra-cotta flowerpots. Who can pay an
American rent, competing head to head with factories
paying Mexican wages for the same items? Not enough
'Buy Local' enthusiasts to go around, not anywhere.
Well, making coffee mugs that compete head to head
with stuff coming over on container ships is equally
dumb. Domestic factories have already given it up as a
bad job. Mass-production continues to improve quality
and design while lowering prices. Making ordinary
pots for ordinary people is a role already nicely covered
by industry, and frankly, their stuff doesn't suck. If you
want to be a full-time potter, you need to make something
special, extraordinary, marvelous. And charge a living
wage for it.
Not everyone is going to be able to do this. Lots of people
want to be potters, and the market just won't support all of
them. Too bad. Not everyone gets to be a pro dancer or
musician, either. Only the best - those with a product worth
the money that a limited market has to offer - will get to
make a go of it as professionals.
Everyone is an artist at some level. Ellen Dissanayake
isn't wrong about that. Making art is a great thing, and
anyone who wants to should do it to their heart's content.
But not everyone gets to be a pro.
You can't substantially change the market. Some buyers
will always be happy with ordinary mass-produced stuff,
and others will be satisfied with amateur work. They aren't
your competition, though. If you want to make a real living,
that part of the market will never be yours anyway. Step
up to the plate and address the one that is.
The market for high-end pottery will never support
everyone who wants to be in it. If you want to be a
success as a professional, you can't be average, or
even competent. You have to be truly excellent, and
make work that doesn't have to use handmadeness or
low price as crutches.
Most musicians will never play Carnegie Hall. Most
will never even make a living at it. Lots of people make
play music. Lots of people make pots, too. Few will make
a comfortable middle-class living at it. Those that do so
are the ones who offer something extraordinary.
-Snail
Lis Allison on thu 8 jul 10
On July 8, 2010, you wrote:
> ... When I started to make sculpture I thought about
> what material to use. Ceramics was one choice, but I realized that
> when people looked at a piece of stone or bronze sculpture, they
> perceived it as something of higher value. ....
> Bronze or stone ..... have an association with "fine art"
> while, i'm sorry to say, ceramics does not.
I agree with your points, Dan, and would like to add a comment to your
point above. I think the public also sees clay as 'not very permanent',
sort of the same way that watercolour paintings are devalued because paper
is seen as ephemeral. Canvas is permanent, thus an investment; paper is
fragile and won't last... I'm trying to call my stuff 'stoneware' or
'porcelain', not 'pottery' or 'clay'. Might help.
Cheers,
Lis, who gave up working today when the temp in the studio hit 37C. Oy.
--
Elisabeth Allison
Pine Ridge Studio
website: www.pine-ridge.ca
Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Marcia Selsor on thu 8 jul 10
Lili did indeed nail it. I am just back from jurying an Arts Festival =3D
and on the whole, the work was very professional, but there was a couple =
=3D
of "just because you can, don't!"
I am now a pensioner after a University teaching career. I sold my =3D
one-off items in galleries. I did work as a production potter prior to =3D
teaching.=3D20
I have always respected those who make a living through their pottery =3D
and always respected market value prices. I know it is hard work and =3D
long hours. I feel fortunate to have a nice studio and no stress to pay =3D
the mortgage because my husband relocated for a great job in deep south =3D
Texas/hurricane land.=3D20
Times are tough for everyone. I liked Sandy Miller's reference to the =3D
Potters Council. Maybe there should be more focus on educating the =3D
public about professional pottery and appreciating what it takes to make =
=3D
it.=3D20
I taught for decades. I still teach workshops. And I make one off items =3D
at my own pace. I love clay as much as anyone on the this list. I just =3D
found a way=3D20
less hard than production pottery. Although, I have to admit, after 25 =3D
years of teaching ceramics, my body gave out and I retired at the first =3D
opportunity.
So maybe Sandy or others could make some suggestions of how Potters =3D
Council might initiate an education of the public. The PC is closely =3D
related to Ceramics Monthly and PMI. Those vehicles already seem to =3D
educate a large population. The American Crafts Council seems to do a =3D
great job through their fairs. I had a booth the ACC fair at Rheinbeck, =
=3D
NY back in 1974. It was a successful experience.Wendy Rosenthal of Niche =
=3D
also promotes Fine Craft. So what might be a solution or a direction =3D
that follows the examples Sandy gave about the glassblowers and fiber =3D
artists? How can Potters promote themselves and Fine Ceramics to get a =3D
decent price to make a living?
Marcia Selsor
Past President of Potters Council 2010
http://www.Americanpotters.com
http://www.marciaselsor.com
Lis Allison on fri 9 jul 10
On July 9, 2010, you wrote:
>
> i mentioned a few months back how i took my mom to AMOCA ....
>
>
> i think i began to crack some of her brain open when i told her clay
> can be thought of like music or dance. it's an expressive material.
> but then i recalled she only likes one form of music that she grew up
> with and never understood any form of dance.... jazz is lost on her
> as well. pots to her are price and function driven.
>
I think that just as there are people who are tone-deaf, there are people
who are unable to 'see' art in any form. Maybe their spiritual dimension
is blocked or otherwise routed. Not a criticism, just a fact about them.
These people are just not our customers.
Lis
--
Elisabeth Allison
Pine Ridge Studio
website: www.pine-ridge.ca
Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
steve graber on fri 9 jul 10
education helps ~ some people.=3DA0 =3D0A=3D0Ai mentioned a few months back=
how i=3D
took my mom to AMOCA (american museum of =3D0Aceramic arts, pomona) and ho=
w =3D
she made sounds over how she didn't like what she =3D0Asaw.=3DA0 she was=3D=
A0comp=3D
letely closed off from remotely understanding the why's and =3D0Ahow's clay=
i=3D
s made or used.=3DA0 =3D0A=3D0A=3D0Ai think i began to crack some of her br=
ain open=3D
when i told her clay can be =3D0Athought of like music or dance.=3DA0 it's=
an =3D
expressive material.=3DA0 but then i =3D0Arecalled she only likes one form =
of m=3D
usic that she grew up with and never =3D0Aunderstood any form of dance....=
=3DA0=3D
jazz is lost on her as well.=3DA0 pots to her are =3D0Aprice and function =
driv=3D
en.=3DA0 =3D0A=3D0A=3D0Anote how many production pots mimic back thrown pot=
feature=3D
s? (i'm thinking of =3D0Athe woop-d-doo's on the bottoms of bowls rather th=
an=3D
a clean bowl form). =3DA0 how =3D0Awould a "common" person ever learn when=
pro=3D
duction pots look like crap?=3DA0 =3D0A=3D0A=3D0Ameanwhile, i=3DA0HAVE met =
people who=3D
have seen AMOCA and have grown to apprecate =3D0Aclay so much more from se=
ei=3D
ng such a museum in person.=3DA0 now if we can either get =3D0Amore places =
like=3D
them to open up around the world to help present such fine =3D0Awork!=3DA0=
=3D0A=3D
=3D0A=3DA0Steve Graber, Graber's Pottery, Inc=3D0AClaremont, California USA=
=3D0AThe=3D
Steve Tool - for awesome texture on pots! =3D0Awww.graberspottery.com stev=
e@=3D
graberspottery.com =3D0A=3D0A=3D0AOn Laguna Clay's website=3D0Ahttp://www.l=
agunacla=3D
y.com/blogs/ =3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A----- Original Message ----=3D0A> From: Li=
s Allison =3D
=3D0A> To: Clayart@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG=3D0A> Sent: Thu, Jul=
y 8,=3D
2010 5:37:32 AM=3D0A> Subject: Re: Pricing. Can we talk?=3D0A> =3D0A> On J=
uly 7,=3D
2010, you wrote:=3D0A> >=3D0A> >..... The facts are that in the group call=
ed "=3D
potters" in this country=3D0A> today=3D0A> > (It may be the same in other p=
lace=3D
s, but I'm not there....) a few=3D0A> > earn their living entirely through =
cl=3D
ay.=3DA0 There are far more who have=3D0A> > some other income...whether a =
part=3D
ner/spouse/pension/trust fund...and=3D0A> > fudge about it all.=3D0A> =3D0A=
> OK, =3D
Lili, you've described the problem nicely. But what do you suggest as=3D0A>=
a=3D
solution? And please, I'd like a solution that allows for entry-level=3D0A=
> =3D
potters to actually enter. I'm not one now, but was.=3D0A> =3D0A> Cheers,=
=3D0A> L=3D
is=3D0A> =3D0A> --=3D0A> Elisabeth Allison=3D0A> Pine Ridge Studio=3D0A> we=
bsite: www=3D
.pine-ridge.ca=3D0A> Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com=3D0=
A> G=3D
arden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com=3D0A> =3D0A=3D0A=3D0A
steve graber on fri 9 jul 10
you're not crazy - i hardly sell pots now.=3DA0=3DA0mine are usually gifts =
or t=3D
ree-trash =3D0Ain the backyard in and around bushes.=3DA0 =3D0A=3D0A=3DA0St=
eve Graber=3D
, Graber's Pottery, Inc=3D0AClaremont, California USA=3D0AThe Steve Tool - =
for =3D
awesome texture on pots! =3D0Awww.graberspottery.com steve@graberspottery.c=
om=3D
=3D0A=3D0A=3D0AOn Laguna Clay's website=3D0Ahttp://www.lagunaclay.com/blog=
s/ =3D0A=3D
=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A----- Original Message ----=3D0A> From: Patty LIHER.CO=3D
M>=3D0A> To: Clayart@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG=3D0A> Sent: Wed, July 7, 2010 10:18:0=
8 PM=3D
=3D0A> Subject: Re: Pricing. Can we talk?=3D0A> =3D0A> I'm often asked "do =
you se=3D
ll your pots?"=3DA0 No, I do not sell my pots.=3DA0 In the=3D0A> past I hav=
e sold=3D
at student sales and remember one teacher (full time=3D0A> potter) telling=
u=3D
s to raise the prices on our mugs and we did.=3D0A> =3D0A> I don't need to =
sell=3D
my pots and I do not want to compete with those who=3D0A> need to live off=
p=3D
ottery.=3DA0 I take candy in a bowl or cup or flowers in a=3D0A> vase as a =
host=3D
ess gift.=3DA0 People look at me as if I am crazy for not selling=3D0A> my =
pots=3D
.=3DA0 Am I crazy?=3D0A> =3D0A> Patty Kaliher=3D0A> =3D0A=3D0A=3D0A
steve graber on fri 9 jul 10
i wonder if our customer base is shrinking in time?=3DA0 =3D0A=3D0Awith the=
loss =3D
of music and art in most schools, i had thought there would become =3D0Aa c=
ra=3D
ving for all things artistic.=3DA0 now i wonder since i generally see (as a=
n =3D
=3D0Aold fart) a quest for simply more video games and IPOD downloads...=3D=
A0=3D
=3DA0=3D0A=3DA0Steve Graber, Graber's Pottery, Inc=3D0AClaremont, Californi=
a USA=3D0A=3D
The Steve Tool - for awesome texture on pots! =3D0Awww.graberspottery.com s=
te=3D
ve@graberspottery.com =3D0A=3D0A=3D0AOn Laguna Clay's website=3D0Ahttp://ww=
w.laguna=3D
clay.com/blogs/ =3D0A=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A----- Original Message ----=3D0A> From:=
Lis Allis=3D
on =3D0A> To: Clayart@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG=3D0A> Sent: Fri, =
July=3D
9, 2010 6:59:05 AM=3D0A> Subject: Re: Pricing. Can we talk?=3D0A> =3D0A> O=
n July=3D
9, 2010, you wrote:=3D0A> =3D0A> >=3D0A> > i mentioned a few months back h=
ow i t=3D
ook my mom to AMOCA ....=3D0A> >=3D0A> >=3D0A> > i think i began to crack s=
ome of=3D
her brain open when i told her clay=3D0A> > can be thought of like music o=
r =3D
dance.=3DA0 it's an expressive material.=3D0A> > but then i recalled she on=
ly l=3D
ikes one form of music that she grew up=3D0A> > with and never understood a=
ny=3D
form of dance....=3DA0 jazz is lost on her=3D0A> > as well.=3DA0 pots to h=
er are=3D
price and function driven.=3D0A> >=3D0A> I think that just as there are pe=
ople=3D
who are tone-deaf, there are people=3D0A> who are unable to 'see' art in a=
ny=3D
form. Maybe their spiritual dimension=3D0A> is blocked or otherwise routed=
. =3D
Not a criticism, just a fact about them.=3D0A> =3D0A> These people are just=
not=3D
our customers.=3D0A> =3D0A> Lis=3D0A> --=3D0A> Elisabeth Allison=3D0A> Pin=
e Ridge St=3D
udio=3D0A> website: www.pine-ridge.ca=3D0A> Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the=
-rid=3D
ge.blogspot.com=3D0A> Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com=3D0=
A> =3D
=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A
Elisabeth Maurland on fri 9 jul 10
Dan,
Well, sure, I doubt the dress sold. Although it was beautiful! It was
just an example. I saw another piece, a beaded sculpture, also for
$11,000. I don't know if that sold either.
But I've had neighbors in the past at outdoor art fairs who have sold
artwork for several thousand for one piece. I know a potter whose
prices range in the thousands, and he does sell.
Elisabeth
On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:14 PM, Daniel Rotblatt wrote:
> Elisabeth,
>
> Agreed, there are other venues to sell work then galleries. I'm
> curious about the $11,000 dress though - did you, or anybody else buy
> it. I never hesitate to put an expensive piece in a venue were I
> don't think it will sell - as long as I have items at the $500-1000
> mark. People often look at that, love it, and then purchase an item
> of lesser cost. It makes the lower priced things seem like a
> bargain. Once again, it is perceived value by the customer. Hell,
> what can I say, I'm a sculptor - I deal in illusions.
>
> I do hope the perception is changing, and I agree that the economy is
> a huge factor in sales right now.
>
> Dan
>
>
> On Jul 8, 2010, at 2:10 PM, Elisabeth Maurland wrote:
>
>> Dan,
>>
>> I think you're right about the perceived value of clay. Also, there
>> is still the perception of potters as hippies, dirty, ragged, dirt
>> poor and loving it.
>>
>> But you don't have to only sell high-end work through galleries.
>> High-end art fairs are another venue where people will spend
>> hundreds and thousands of dollars on a piece, such as a bronze
>> sculpture. There are many of those in the country, both indoor and
>> outdoor. I guess you would classify my work as high-end pottery, but
>> I only sell at fine art and craft fairs, since I can't afford the
>> commission that galleries take, nor can I sell my work at wholesale
>> prices.
>> (At one indoor show I did this year, I saw a dress that Ii liked.
>> Price tag: $11,000.)
>>
>> At shows, I dress up and act professionally, as do most of the art
>> fair artists I know, so to at least part of the public, the
>> perception might be changing. Just not fast enough. The economy
>> isn't helping either.
>>
>> Elisabeth
>>
>>
>> On Jul 8, 2010, at 12:14 PM, Daniel Rotblatt wrote:
>>
>>> Lili,
>>>
>>> You've got some excellent points. I don't sell my pottery, I'm a
>>> sculptor in bronze and stone selling fine art and perhaps my take on
>>> this my be of interest. It is of course my own opinions.
>>>
>>> How to make sales is always a consideration to all of us. For me
>>> there are several factors, but the perception of the buyer is of
>>> primary importance. When I started to make sculpture I thought
>>> about
>>> what material to use. Ceramics was one choice, but I realized that
>>> when people looked at a piece of stone or bronze sculpture, they
>>> perceived it as something of higher value. At least in the case of
>>> my sculpture, clay is a malleable substance, easy (at least in the
>>> perception of the public) to form into any shape. In their opinion,
>>> we just shape it and stick it in a kiln. Bronze or stone have an
>>> automatic "Wow" factor in just how they are formed which adds to its
>>> mystic and value. Further, they have an association with "fine art"
>>> while, i'm sorry to say, ceramics does not. This is not a critique
>>> on either medium as art, just an observation on what I have seen in
>>> public perception.
>>>
>>> Even so, I don't think the primary issue is one of craft vs. fine
>>> art. More, I think that the perception of pottery is undercut by
>>> mass produced ceramics. A mug at a K-mart is $4 - I'm sure the ones
>>> that you make are far superior in looks, but for functionality the
>>> $4
>>> one probably works just as well. You have to compete with that
>>> perception, and it just can't be done. Most people look at your mug
>>> and don't realize the time and effort that went into it. They don't
>>> realize the difference in work between hand work vs. factory mass
>>> production. Those that do, or are attracted to the concept of hand-
>>> made, may buy it if they like it. Personally, I think that mass
>>> production is the primary factor in undercutting handmade ceramics
>>> prices - like so many things in the modern world. It's like Wall
>>> Marts putting the little business out of business.
>>>
>>> There is also the factor of how the work is marketed. Face it, I'm
>>> not going to sell any $4-5,000 sculptures at a fair or swap meet.
>>> I'm going to sell it through a gallery. If you are selling at a
>>> farmers market, your price point has to be one that will attract
>>> someone for an impulse buy. High end ceramics (meaning over couple
>>> of hundred per piece) is going to sell the same way as fine art -
>>> through a gallery. People going to fairs and farmers markets are
>>> there to relax, maybe to pick up a memory - they're not going to
>>> spend huge sums of money on a whim (generally not over $100). In a
>>> gallery, at least a good one, the gallery owner will be putting
>>> buyers/collectors together with the artwork (which is how they earn
>>> their commission). Lastly, fine art or ceramics at this level all
>>> have some special quality. One of them is that they are unique, or
>>> at least limited editions. People spending this kind of money want
>>> that.
>>>
>>> Anyway, that's my two cents. I don't know any solutions, it's a
>>> hard
>>> fact of life. Reality is, as long as people will make and sell
>>> pottery for low prices, then that will set the price. If I've
>>> stepped on any toes, I apologize - but it's just my opinions and
>>> observations of how things seem to work, not my philosophy or
>>> beliefs. If I had my way, all artists would be revered and paid
>>> commensurate to their skills and creativity. The thread struck me
>>> since it is something I am very focused on right now - the economy
>>> being what it is.
>>>
>>> Dan Rotblatt
>>> www.RotblattSculpture.com
Bonnie Staffel on sat 10 jul 10
I guess I could answer some of these questions. I started out going to =3D
art
fairs back in the late 40s and sold a few pots in my hometown area. =3D
People
didn't know what pottery was. I felt I had to educate them. However, =3D
when I
attended the third Ann Arbor Art Fair in the early 50s I found that they
knew all about clay and what it was used for. Sales were phenomenal and
thoughts went through my head that Michigan was where it was at. Over a
period of time I then signed up for any Michigan art fair with =3D
additional
success. Ohio just hadn't caught up to this medium. When it came time =3D
for us
to make a decision about leaving Toledo, we started searching Michigan =3D
for
the right spot. I was also of the belief that art fairs were like gypsy
sales, no foundation. So on opening our gallery and studio up north, we =3D
were
THERE and settled. After purchasing the property and got started, every =3D
fair
I attended after that was my form of advertising our studio. So many =3D
people
came to northern Michigan to vacation and it seemed to us that it was a
perfect spot to open our business. With new visitors coming north, there =
=3D
was
a good turnover of customers. We advertised in an Art Craft Trails =3D
bulletin
which led the customers to our door. We put posters around town and our
brochures in motels/hotels and restaurants. The newspapers picked up on =3D
our
endeavors and since we were the first ones on the block, they gave us
coverage and news stories that gave credence to our business.=3D20
I was able to price my work according to the sales and my ability to =3D
make
multiple work. If it went out the door too fast, the price went up. When =
=3D
I
got tired of making some items, I priced it up further. One thing I =3D
found
out was that customers buy and perceive the price according to size. A
bigger mug was no more work to make than a smaller one, still I had to =3D
have
it priced accordingly. At first we made small vases and items for the
tourists. At that time $1.50 was still a big price to pay for a tiny =3D
vase.
You can see some of mine on eBay now and then. Customers stopped buying =3D
my
honey pots when I raised them to $17.50. If I made them now I would =3D
expect
no less that $35 and even more. Mine were unusual. I have made so many =3D
mugs
in my lifetime they bore me to death so I expect $35 or more for them if =
=3D
I
ever decide to make any. Actually I could get more for a similarly sized
vase than for a mug with half the work.=3D20
Going to fairs and observing other potter's pricing if you feel they are =
=3D
in
your league of quality, will give a fair price for you to follow. If =3D
they go
out of stock faster than you want, then up the price. You have something =
=3D
of
greater value here. A gallery that I consigned to had the policy that if =
=3D
the
work didn't sell the first few weeks he had it, he upped the price. =3D
Guess it
worked for him, (?) however he is out of business now.=3D20
I have weathered highs and lows in the economy as it seems to come in =3D
waves.
However, this is one of the worst slumps ever, especially in Michigan,
having lost the automotive base. I cannot judge too well now as my =3D
output is
not anywhere near that which I used to do. But I get a check every month =
=3D
or
so from the galleries I am in and my prices are not low any more. Maybe =3D
that
is the privilege of longevity and a good reputation. We will see. But I =3D
have
been there and done that. It is all a learning curve.
Bonnie
http://webpages.charter.net/bstaffel/
http://vasefinder.com/bstaffelgallery1.html
DVD=3DA0 Throwing with Coils and Slabs
DVD=3DA0 Introduction to Wheel Work
Charter Member Potters Council
Snail Scott on sun 11 jul 10
Here's part 2:
Education may increase buyer demand for quality
craftsmanship, and a (hypothetical) standards council
might enforce a legal minimum, but none of these
things will make people buy stuff they don't like for
other reasons.
How many potters are making pots that stepped right
out of the 70's, impeccably made but the same as they
always were, and the same as a hundred other people's
work. They sell well to the same people they always did -
long-hairs in Volkwagens. Kind of a limited clientele
these days, isn't it? (speaking as a long-hair with a
Volkswagen...)
Naturally, not all potters are as described above, but
too many see their own interest in craft and process
as the essential thing about their work. It is to them,
to course, but it almost never is to a buyer. You aren't
selling process, nor craftsmanship; you are selling an
object. Craftsmanship is just one potential aspect of
its desirability.
The emphasis by potters on craftsmanship and tradition
has isolated pottery from a really large segment of the
potential buying public who simply doesn't know or
care about that, but would love to buy cool, spiffy,
useful or unique stuff, whether handmade or not.
We've talked about the popularity of glass a bit lately.
I see several reasons for the popularity of studio glass.
For one, it's brightly colored and shiny. Fashion waxes
and wanes on the desirability of those traits, but right
now, it's definitely a Good Thing. Potters cringe at the
sight of bright cobalt-blue glazes, but glass in that
color sells like hotcakes. Are potters just afraid of
doing something as easy as a glossy cobalt glaze,
for fear of looking unskilled? If so, get over it. I had
a gallery owner (who also showed my work) once
show me a pot on display, saying: "It must be very
difficult to get that intense blue, because none of my
other potters ever seem to, but I sell all that this guy
can bring me". CLUE!
It's pretty. Pretty is a bit of a dirty word in fine art, as it
is seen as superficial and lacking 'seriousness'. Both
potters who aim for art status and those who distain it
seem to share an aversion to pretty, though. What gives?
Pretty paintings outsell 'serious' one, too, folks. People
like pretty in their homes. Glass seldom aspires to be
anything but aesthetically pleasing in a very basic way.
It seems new. Not just because it's shiny, though that
may not hurt. Although glasswork has ancient roots,
current studio glass seems less bound to them. The
buyer seldom knows or cares about antecedents and
dialogue with traditional practice, and in glass they
see something that looks like their own era and life.
Studio glass too has competition with cheap knockoffs
and hacks. Mass-produced glass at cheap prices still
looks nice on the mantel, and inept student work still
sells well. These issues aren't unique to pottery, and
there's a limit on what education can do if people truly
don't care. Glass does have fewer half-trained hacks
competing, it's true, maybe because fewer people do
it, fewer art centers offer the option, and a glass furnace
is a far bigger commitment than a basic electric kiln.
However, this may just lead to a less-critical buying
public.
As I've said before, feel free to make what you like, but
if you want to make a living wage at it, potters need to
look outside the clayworld itself for inspiration, and offer
something to the buyer besides your own experience
in the making. That's your reward, not theirs.
Now to reference John's original post: craftsmanship may
be a worthy foundation indeed, but it needs to hold up a
really appealing house or no one will care.
-Snail
John Hesselberth on mon 12 jul 10
On Jul 11, 2010, at 6:17 PM, Snail Scott wrote:
> Now to reference John's original post: craftsmanship may
> be a worthy foundation indeed, but it needs to hold up a
> really appealing house or no one will care.
You are right on Snail! But if the foundation fails the really appealing =
=3D
house fails too Unfortunately it doesn't fail until a person and bought =3D
it and the potter has disappeared into the mist.
Regards,
John
Ron Roy on mon 12 jul 10
Hi Snail,
I'm not just answering you - I want everyone to understand what this
is about - no doubt in my mind that it's an important issue.
If we were to support the idea of good craftsmanship here on clayart -
as a group - so that others would understand how important it is -
that would help.
I'm not talking about style - I'm talking about leaky pots and glazes
that fit.
Poorly crafted ware discourages sales - ask anyone who ever bought a
pot and it did not perform as expected.
We have an opportunity to do what clay companies, glaze makers and
authors have failed to do - support the idea of well made functional
ware.
I have brought the subject up many times on this list and have waited
- mostly in vain - for others to second the motion.
I simply do not understand why the idea of making pots that don't leak
is not a popular idea. Thats just basic stuff - or should be.
I know that for years it was unfashionable for "artists" to be
concerned with such mundane ideas. The fact is however that there are
no standards now - anyone can do anything - as long as it looks as if
it will hold water.
I do know several potters who do make sure their ware works for it's
intended use - they work hard at it - and it does increase sales in
the long run but most simply don't care - not a part of the job, too
much trouble, to hard to be creative and make sure the quality is
there as well.
In each group there are both professionals and amateurs, creative and
traditional potters - it's time to try and convince those who don't
care enough to make truly useful work that it's in the best interest
of us all to try and do the job properly.
I wonder if it sounds like I care about this?
RR
Quoting Snail Scott :
> Here's part 2:
>
> Education may increase buyer demand for quality
> craftsmanship, and a (hypothetical) standards council
> might enforce a legal minimum, but none of these
> things will make people buy stuff they don't like for
> other reasons.
Snail Scott on tue 13 jul 10
On Jul 12, 2010, at 7:48 PM, ronroy@CA.INTER.NET wrote:
> ...I simply do not understand why the idea of making pots that don't
> leak is not a popular idea. Thats just basic stuff - or should be...
There's a legal concept that says any product
offered for sale needs to fulfill a reasonable
buyer's expectations of it. If it's a fan and it
doesn't blow air, the maker can't claim that
it's still a dandy doorstop, and if it's a stove it
ought to cook, not be labeled after the fact as
a pretty good lawn ornament. That's law, and
that's ethics as well.
A coffee cup ought not to leak, nor shatter when
hot liquids are poured in, nor poison the user.
These are all expectations of a reasonable buyer,
and if potters were richer, a lot of them would get
sued on this basis alone.
Other standards are harder to nail down. Some
people think a teapot opening should be large
enough to allow for cleaning inside, while others
see that as unnecessary. Recently, I saw work by
a noted potter: beautiful cups. Labor-intensive
in the extreme, highly detailed, with impeccable
attention to aesthetics and finish. And the form
would never allow the user to drink the last 20%
of the beverage, nor let it fully drain after washing,
but would instead accumulate residues in all the
lovely convolutions. Were these unacceptable
cups? Some would say yes; function is paramount.
Others would say that some reduced function is
an acceptable price to pay for such unique beauty.
I believe that in this case, it's the buyer's call as
the limitations of the object were clearly visible
to anyone. A concealed flaw, like unstable glaze,
is a far different matter, however, and I do regret
that there are potters too ignorant to know the
necessity, and (fewer, I hope) who ignore the
problem for the sake of convenience or a pretty,
salable surface.
In some cases, the maker may not be aware of
defects that arise in use. A mug by a well-regarded
local potter, in her most popular green glaze, turned
a nasty shade of tan inside after a year or so of use.
When I showed it to her, it was the first she'd heard
of any problem,. A tall mug by another maker
split it half the first time hot water was poured in.
It was skilled, experienced work, but had the maker
ever pushed it to its limit himself? (I'd tell him, but
I never met him subsequently. Does he perhaps not
know, even now?)
I am a believer in standards, but defining them can
be tricky. When is a decorative vessel too bowl-like
to use a leaching surface treatment? How prescient
must the maker be in anticipating 'likely use'? If
paint and rhinestones are acceptable on a charger
but not a dinner plate, is the mere presence of said
surfaces sufficient to define it as a charger? And so
on.
Is there possibly any set of universal minimums?
I suggest that in fact, every circumstance requires
a different set of standards, which like historical
Poland's variety of borders, may not overlap certain
others at any point.
It may be up to practitioners within similar pursuits
to police like-minded objects. Persuasion ? Education?
Ostracism? Prosecution? Nasty comments on
Facebook?The fact that clay has a greater sense of
community than most media may help, but actual
enforcement seems impossible.
-Snail
Snail Scott on tue 13 jul 10
On Jul 12, 2010, at 2:38 PM, John Hesselberth wrote:
>
> You are right on Snail! But if the foundation fails the really
> appealing house fails too Unfortunately it doesn't fail until a
> person and bought it and the potter has disappeared into the mist.
Unfortunate? Maybe that is the true recipe for success:
slap-dash craftsmanship and a really fast van!
(and mist...) ;)
-Snail
Dolita Dohrman on tue 13 jul 10
Ron...for what it is worth, I second the motion! In my humble foray =3D
into making pots, I am often amazed at how many well-known, experienced =3D
potters either don't care about vitrification or the food safety of =3D
glazes, or don't know. How hard is it to figure it out? A few books, a =
=3D
few experiments (water in a vase on newspaper for 24 hours or weighing a =
=3D
test tile before soaking for a period of time, then weighing again). If =
=3D
we can just get everyone to cover those bases it would help our craft =3D
immensely.=3D20
Dolita in Kentucky
On Jul 12, 2010, at 8:48 PM, Ron Roy wrote:
> I have brought the subject up many times on this list and have waited
> - mostly in vain - for others to second the motion.
>=3D20
> I simply do not understand why the idea of making pots that don't leak
> is not a popular idea. Thats just basic stuff - or should be.
>=3D20
phil on sun 18 jul 10
Hi Snail, all...
Below...amid...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Snail Scott"
> On Jul 12, 2010, at 7:48 PM, ronroy@CA.INTER.NET wrote:
>> ...I simply do not understand why the idea of making pots that don't
>> leak is not a popular idea. Thats just basic stuff - or should be...
> There's a legal concept that says any product
> offered for sale needs to fulfill a reasonable
> buyer's expectations of it.
Like Congress, the Senate...the Oval Office...FDA...DEA...BofATFand now als=
o
'E', DOE, DOI, ICC, FBI, HUD, etc, and, etc...
> If it's a fan and it
> doesn't blow air, the maker can't claim that
> it's still a dandy doorstop, and if it's a stove it
> ought to cook, not be labeled after the fact as
> a pretty good lawn ornament. That's law, and
> that's ethics as well.
What determines the conditions for where, if at all, this is to be applied?
And, by whom?
I thought unilateral imposition, with a vengence even, with contempt, and t=
o
force one to pay for it by threat of violence, was 'the american dream'?
Ledgislators, banking cartels, investors, politicians, ceos, bureaucrats, e=
t
al, seem to think so...
> A coffee cup ought not to leak, nor shatter when
> hot liquids are poured in, nor poison the user.
Wouldn't it be nice...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DL--cqAI3IUI
> These are all expectations of a reasonable buyer,
> and if potters were richer, a lot of them would get
> sued on this basis alone.
I think Fritz Pearls put an end to that.
'Expectations' are 'wrong'!!!
Wish I could have met him.
I would have sounded his 'expectations'...then offered him a Hanky...
> Other standards are harder to nail down.
Yuppers...
> Some
> people think a teapot opening should be large
> enough to allow for cleaning inside, while others
> see that as unnecessary. Recently, I saw work by
> a noted potter: beautiful cups. Labor-intensive
> in the extreme, highly detailed, with impeccable
> attention to aesthetics and finish. And the form
> would never allow the user to drink the last 20%
> of the beverage, nor let it fully drain after washing,
> but would instead accumulate residues in all the
> lovely convolutions. Were these unacceptable
> cups? Some would say yes; function is paramount.
> Others would say that some reduced function is
> an acceptable price to pay for such unique beauty.
Topical or superficial Beauty as primary attribute...can have it's
compromises or liabilities the moment one begins to wish for something more=
.
See 'Miss America' again...
Or some of my exes...
( shudder...)
> I believe that in this case, it's the buyer's call as
> the limitations of the object were clearly visible
> to anyone. A concealed flaw, like unstable glaze,
> is a far different matter, however, and I do regret
> that there are potters too ignorant to know the
> necessity, and (fewer, I hope) who ignore the
> problem for the sake of convenience or a pretty,
> salable surface.
Things ( and buyers themselves, of anything ) 'work' on multiple dimensions
at once...or, however so, anyway...
> In some cases, the maker may not be aware of
> defects that arise in use.
...one reason I have never found 'religion' or 'monotheism' to have any
appeal for me, whatever.
> A mug by a well-regarded
> local potter, in her most popular green glaze, turned
> a nasty shade of tan inside after a year or so of use.
I am sorry to hear this...
> When I showed it to her, it was the first she'd heard
> of any problem,. A tall mug by another maker
> split it half the first time hot water was poured in.
Ditto...
> It was skilled, experienced work, but had the maker
> ever pushed it to its limit himself? (I'd tell him, but
> I never met him subsequently. Does he perhaps not
> know, even now?)
Well...possibly the Clay Body could have benifited from some adjustment.
> I am a believer in standards, but defining them can
> be tricky.
Yes...
In Mechanical or Electrical or Chemical Engineering, there is a better
platform than in many other things.
How one cares, also enters into it, of course.
> When is a decorative vessel too bowl-like
> to use a leaching surface treatment? How prescient
> must the maker be in anticipating 'likely use'? If
> paint and rhinestones are acceptable on a charger
> but not a dinner plate, is the mere presence of said
> surfaces sufficient to define it as a charger? And so
> on.
Yup...
Discernment and understanding on the part of the buyer would be the ideal
condition...allowing the Chips to fall where they may, otherwise.
> Is there possibly any set of universal minimums?
Not any more...
> I suggest that in fact, every circumstance requires
> a different set of standards, which like historical
> Poland's variety of borders, may not overlap certain
> others at any point.
Well, Poland had some complex internal co-existences of influential
factions, by who's assertions and gambits, 'Boarder' contentions, and issue=
s
occuring within that, then reliably occurred.
This would need to be looked at carefully, if one wished to understand how
not-simple it was.
> It may be up to practitioners within similar pursuits
> to police like-minded objects. Persuasion ? Education?
> Ostracism? Prosecution?
"Goulags"
And re-education at Bayonete point.
Lol...
Sorry, I got carried away a little...
> Nasty comments on
> Facebook?The fact that clay has a greater sense of
> community than most media may help, but actual
> enforcement seems impossible.
>
> -Snail
I would say Pottery as such, in the US, is in much better shape than lots o=
f
other things are.
Far as that goes...
Love,
Phil
Lv
| |
|
