Dave Finkelnburg on thu 15 mar 01
I think your heart is truly in the right place here. The potter
provides photos of his work and gets nothing for them at the time, except
the hope of future work, future sales, notoriety (if the books sells and is
read), etc, etc. You don't like that. Neither do I, particularly.
That is how the system currently works, though, and will continue to
work, as long as there is no shortage of free photos. As long as enough of
us ceramic artists are willing to pay photographers to take photos which we
artists then give away to book authors and their publishers, why should
authors and publishers buy photos?
Does this begin to sound like Wendy Rosen railing at us for underpricing
our work? It's exactly the same situation, only we give away slides instead
Not that I should worry. About the only way slide of my work will wind
up in a book is if I pay a hefty fee for the privilege. :-) Vince, on
the other hand, regularly produces work of a quality which could improve
many books. His perspective, I think, is based on the reality of the
Unless one can truly change that practice, complaining about it isn't
accomplishing much. Therefore, I think I'll go do something more
productive...like shoot some slides!
Idaho Fire Pottery
vince pitelka on fri 16 mar 01
> That is how the system currently works, though, and will continue to
> work, as long as there is no shortage of free photos. As long as enough
> us ceramic artists are willing to pay photographers to take photos which
> artists then give away to book authors and their publishers, why should
> authors and publishers buy photos?
Sorry if I seem irritated by this. My response is directed towards this
whole thread, and not specifically to your post in particular. But I just
can't see what is so difficult about this. You are not giving photos away,
at your loss. You are investing money to document your work for a whole
host of reasons having to do with record-keeping, grant and show
applications, publicity. Much publicity costs big bucks, and many artists
invest big bucks in expensive publicity. When you contribute photos
for books or magazines, it is very good publicity. Those books remain in
people's collections for decades, usually far longer than any magazine.
Those books go into libraries all over the world, and are viewed repeatedly
by thousands of people.
As I have already said, it does surprise me a bit that this discussion has
proved so volatile. I cannot see that the artist is the least bit put upon
for the small cost of contributing photos to a book endeavor. Come on
folks, it's great free publicity. As far as documentation of your work
goes, having the work appear in a legitimate book is as close to permanent
documentation as you can get.
When you show your work in an exhibiton, you pay an entry fee and you do not
even know if you will get accepted. If you do get accepted, it constitutes
significant recognition of you and your work, and is certainly grounds for
celebration. Unless someone writes an article about the exhibition it is
unlikely that more than a few thousand people will see the work in the
exhibition. Seems to me that having images of your work selected for
inclusion in books also constitutes significant recognition, and it should
be seen as an honor.
Best wishes -
Appalachian Center for Crafts
Tennessee Technological University
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Home - email@example.com
Work - firstname.lastname@example.org
615/597-6801 ext. 111, fax 615/597-6803
Pam on sat 17 mar 01
>From a post by Vince Pitelka:
> As I have already said, it does surprise me a bit that this discussion has
> proved so volatile. I cannot see that the artist is the least bit put
> for the small cost of contributing photos to a book endeavor. Come on
> folks, it's great free publicity. As far as documentation of your work
> goes, having the work appear in a legitimate book is as close to permanent
> documentation as you can get.
I paint, draw and print. It has usually been a cause for celebration to
work _published_, even in a low-distribution catalog or in the newspaper--
even with a less than favorable review. You're out there. Even if the fact
the work has been chosen to be recorded in a fairly permanent manner is
not enough, it's at least good resume material. Not that that's why you'd
do it, of course.
I haven't been published much, personally, but I was so excited the first
had a painting in a catalog for a works-on-paper exhibition. Then they
spelled my last name "Sheldor" instead of "Shelor." Close enough at the