<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The marketplace could destroy an artist’s gift</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2008/11/17/the-marketplace-could-destroy-an-artist%e2%80%99s-gift/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2008/11/17/the-marketplace-could-destroy-an-artist%e2%80%99s-gift/</link>
	<description>Former Photography Director Rob Haggart</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:32:46 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: jACOB</title>
		<link>http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2008/11/17/the-marketplace-could-destroy-an-artist%e2%80%99s-gift/comment-page-1/#comment-44681</link>
		<dc:creator>jACOB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2009 23:34:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aphotoeditor.com/?p=1410#comment-44681</guid>
		<description>@Bitter photographer, 

you are %100 right. especialiy about the 1,000,000,000.01 &quot;photographers&quot; (read: consumers/hobbyists) who buy digital cameras and suddenly they&#039;re bargain-basement Richard Avedon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Bitter photographer, </p>
<p>you are %100 right. especialiy about the 1,000,000,000.01 &#8220;photographers&#8221; (read: consumers/hobbyists) who buy digital cameras and suddenly they&#8217;re bargain-basement Richard Avedon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Shipman</title>
		<link>http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2008/11/17/the-marketplace-could-destroy-an-artist%e2%80%99s-gift/comment-page-1/#comment-32776</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Shipman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:20:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aphotoeditor.com/?p=1410#comment-32776</guid>
		<description>I consider myself an artist first, before I am an editorial or commercial shooter. Probably because I was an artist long before I started trying to make money at it.  You can certainly be a photographer without &quot;artistic passion&quot; but, for me, there needs to be something more than just economics driving my creativity. I continue to shoot artistically even though I derive less income from it. Because it is personally satisfying, it&#039;s time for me and not someone else. It&#039;s necessary for me to remain creative and not fall into the hole of repetition and cookie-cutter production.

I know some commercial photographers who admittedly do not understand or have any interest in &quot;artsy fartsy&quot; photography and are in the business as a business.  In reality, these types of individuals could probably just as easily be in any other career. They don&#039;t &quot;need&quot; to be a photographer whereas an artist, whether that person is creating &quot;pure&quot; art or commercial art, has a need through passion to be working in that medium for whatever reason.

I know several artists who, once they became commercially famous, lost their desire to create because of the demands (through distributors/publishers) forcing them (through contracts) to create works that didn&#039;t interest them personally or artistically but were commercially successful (to a broad market where once they were creating limited, high end works to a smaller, &quot;more appreciative&quot; audience). They were essentially &quot;owned&quot; by the companies they signed with. They made tons of money, but were artistically and personally unsatisfied because the work was less like art and more like work.

The successful artist, in my mind, is one who can balance the capitalistic, profit maximizing demands of the marketplace with personal control of the work being produced (if a person wants to make money creating art). That means the individual has to take a stand for themselves, understand the marketplace and the demands it requires, to look at the longer view and not be blinded by perceived short term gains, to be in control of their own destiny.

There are many, many people creating excellent art with no intention or desire to make money at it. They are creating art because it satisfies them in some way and that, in itself, is enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I consider myself an artist first, before I am an editorial or commercial shooter. Probably because I was an artist long before I started trying to make money at it.  You can certainly be a photographer without &#8220;artistic passion&#8221; but, for me, there needs to be something more than just economics driving my creativity. I continue to shoot artistically even though I derive less income from it. Because it is personally satisfying, it&#8217;s time for me and not someone else. It&#8217;s necessary for me to remain creative and not fall into the hole of repetition and cookie-cutter production.</p>
<p>I know some commercial photographers who admittedly do not understand or have any interest in &#8220;artsy fartsy&#8221; photography and are in the business as a business.  In reality, these types of individuals could probably just as easily be in any other career. They don&#8217;t &#8220;need&#8221; to be a photographer whereas an artist, whether that person is creating &#8220;pure&#8221; art or commercial art, has a need through passion to be working in that medium for whatever reason.</p>
<p>I know several artists who, once they became commercially famous, lost their desire to create because of the demands (through distributors/publishers) forcing them (through contracts) to create works that didn&#8217;t interest them personally or artistically but were commercially successful (to a broad market where once they were creating limited, high end works to a smaller, &#8220;more appreciative&#8221; audience). They were essentially &#8220;owned&#8221; by the companies they signed with. They made tons of money, but were artistically and personally unsatisfied because the work was less like art and more like work.</p>
<p>The successful artist, in my mind, is one who can balance the capitalistic, profit maximizing demands of the marketplace with personal control of the work being produced (if a person wants to make money creating art). That means the individual has to take a stand for themselves, understand the marketplace and the demands it requires, to look at the longer view and not be blinded by perceived short term gains, to be in control of their own destiny.</p>
<p>There are many, many people creating excellent art with no intention or desire to make money at it. They are creating art because it satisfies them in some way and that, in itself, is enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bitter photographer</title>
		<link>http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2008/11/17/the-marketplace-could-destroy-an-artist%e2%80%99s-gift/comment-page-1/#comment-32535</link>
		<dc:creator>Bitter photographer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:00:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aphotoeditor.com/?p=1410#comment-32535</guid>
		<description>That last sentence is a load of shit.

Here are some things that will destroy an artist&#039;s gift:

- $500 editorial day rates (in this expensive digital age) with interminable contracts, demands for original receipts and all rights, and being treated with contempt by clients who don&#039;t give a shit whether you can make a living or not because there are fifty people in line behind you.
- A buyer&#039;s market caused by a million digital photographers entering the market, all prepared to accept low rates and give away all rights.
- Hours wasted on the computer archiving, retouching and sending files to clients who aren&#039;t prepared to pay for that time (or equipment for that matter).
- Clients who can&#039;t recognize or don&#039;t care about the quality of the work they publish.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That last sentence is a load of shit.</p>
<p>Here are some things that will destroy an artist&#8217;s gift:</p>
<p>- $500 editorial day rates (in this expensive digital age) with interminable contracts, demands for original receipts and all rights, and being treated with contempt by clients who don&#8217;t give a shit whether you can make a living or not because there are fifty people in line behind you.<br />
- A buyer&#8217;s market caused by a million digital photographers entering the market, all prepared to accept low rates and give away all rights.<br />
- Hours wasted on the computer archiving, retouching and sending files to clients who aren&#8217;t prepared to pay for that time (or equipment for that matter).<br />
- Clients who can&#8217;t recognize or don&#8217;t care about the quality of the work they publish.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ellen</title>
		<link>http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2008/11/17/the-marketplace-could-destroy-an-artist%e2%80%99s-gift/comment-page-1/#comment-32372</link>
		<dc:creator>ellen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:41:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aphotoeditor.com/?p=1410#comment-32372</guid>
		<description>I do believe that this an American-centric way of thinking. 
In Europe and the UK, the Arts are funded differently with the value measured by the practice and the work.
http://www.artangel.org.uk/ is one example of such an organization  and this is another - 
http://www.locusplus.org.uk/index2.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do believe that this an American-centric way of thinking.<br />
In Europe and the UK, the Arts are funded differently with the value measured by the practice and the work.<br />
<a href="http://www.artangel.org.uk/" rel="nofollow">http://www.artangel.org.uk/</a> is one example of such an organization  and this is another &#8211;<br />
<a href="http://www.locusplus.org.uk/index2.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.locusplus.org.uk/index2.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Art And The Marketplace</title>
		<link>http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2008/11/17/the-marketplace-could-destroy-an-artist%e2%80%99s-gift/comment-page-1/#comment-32359</link>
		<dc:creator>Art And The Marketplace</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:51:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aphotoeditor.com/?p=1410#comment-32359</guid>
		<description>[...] Off Photography.alltop.com I found this interesting article about art and the marketplace. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="padding: 1em; background-color: #FFF8DC">[...] Off Photography.alltop.com I found this interesting article about art and the marketplace. [...]</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Hamilton</title>
		<link>http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2008/11/17/the-marketplace-could-destroy-an-artist%e2%80%99s-gift/comment-page-1/#comment-32351</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Hamilton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:08:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aphotoeditor.com/?p=1410#comment-32351</guid>
		<description>The marketplace gets a bad wrap. If it weren&#039;t for the market place, artists might spend a lot less time making art, and a lot more time mopping floors. There&#039;s a lot to be said for the value of practice when it comes to art. If you&#039;re not practicing, you&#039;re not improving.

I sincerely believe that the marketplace enables more gifts than it destroys.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The marketplace gets a bad wrap. If it weren&#8217;t for the market place, artists might spend a lot less time making art, and a lot more time mopping floors. There&#8217;s a lot to be said for the value of practice when it comes to art. If you&#8217;re not practicing, you&#8217;re not improving.</p>
<p>I sincerely believe that the marketplace enables more gifts than it destroys.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
