vince pitelka on sat 12 jan 02
don't work for free)
> Photography is one of my passions. Years ago, I did a series on mothers
and
> daughters. Some of the pictures were used to illustrate child raising
books
> for an obscure nonprofit group (one not rolling in $$$). They paid me for
my
> pictures. The rate depended upon whether the photos were b&W or color. One
of
> my photos was used for the cover of a book and I received more for that.
Shula -
I'm sorry, but this is no comparison at all. You were getting paid for
being a photographer, and the photographs were the commodity. That is a
completely different situation.
> I say we stand up and support each other. This seems like a noble cause.
Here's a little more vitriol. This is a completely ridiculous and misguided
cause. If we boycott publishers that do not pay for photographs, then less
ceramics books will be published. We will have less access to information,
and we will get less publicity for our work. I cannot believe that anyone
would be so selfish and short sighted. Face it, this is the reality of
art-book publishing. No one is getting rich off these books. We need to
support the system as it is, and thus support the dissemination of
information and the free publicizing of our work.
Best wishes -
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Crafts
Tennessee Technological University
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Home - vpitelka@dtccom.net
615/597-5376
Work - wpitelka@tntech.edu
615/597-6801 ext. 111, fax 615/597-6803
http://www.craftcenter.tntech.edu/
Kate Johnson on sun 13 jan 02
don't work fo...
Hi, Marie and list...
I truly think that we need to look at the
> benefits that we receive from having images of ours included in
publications.
> If pay is one of those benefits all the better, if not, look at the
exposure,
> the preceived professionalism we gain from others who are impressed at our
> professional status in the community of our art....
You bring up an interesting point, here...our perceived professionalism.
That IS rather the point. It does give us prestige when our work appears in
print (or on TV, or on the 'net), because the public BELIEVES it does. They
don't have a clue whether we were paid for the images or whether WE paid to
have them appear in printed form, as when a bunch of artists get together to
do, say, a calendar of their work--they just know they've seen our work on
the printed page or other public venue.
I can't tell you how many times "ordinary people," if there is such an
animal, have confused a paid ad for an article about an artist or
writer..."I saw the article about you in the paper!"
And the thing is that they saw it, and remembered...and perhaps are now
there, checkbook in hand, ready to take some of it home.
Last time there was an article about me (yep, a real article, that time)
I had every intention of utilizing that psychological connection and making
copies of the article to use as handouts at the gallery that's now handling
my work...make that connection in people's minds between publicity/prestige
and my paintings. (Of course the fact that I never got around to it says
something about my skill at marketing, duhhhh....)
>
> I prefer to see all glasses as half full!
Yep, I came out as an Idealist on the Keirsey Test, too. Again.
Best--
Kate
iandol on mon 14 jan 02
Dear Kate Johnson,
You make some great points but I would like to pick upon a phrase in =
your quote, one which I think directs us to the crux. The quotation clip =
is <>
Exposure seem to be a very variable concept and you are determined to =
make the most of the spare sheets.
We have been told about short print runs and there are some very long =
print runs. I have written biographical articles which have about 10K =
printings. The people who were featured received some response. The =
publisher even paid the artist for their time when they were =
interviewed which was a generous thing to do. Another article was re-run =
with my subject on the front cover. I think CM has a subscriber list of =
about 40K and PMI getting on for 20K. But I class them as having =
professional interest. Does anyone know the circulation figures of =
CraftArts International or the other coffee table mags. (is there still =
a Harpers?). If the Publisher of the bowls book has a print run of 1K, =
they may all go to potters who are impoverished and looking for bright =
ideas. Not much qudos in that. But if they print 100K and it is picked =
up by collectors and galleries World wide, then that is EXPOSURE.
Perhaps People who have been featured recently in the major periodicals =
or those superb Peter Lane books might like to speak of their experience =
of returns on the effort needed to provide the information. I'm sure the =
analysis of this would be revealing, one way or another.
A bright idea, and I'm sure it has been done, is for authors to take =
their books to the NCECA and sell them with the advice to get all of the =
pictures signed by the contributing artists who are visiting the show.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis. Redhill, South Australia. (with no bowl picture to send)
| |
|
