Has anyone tried this??

I have seen scenarios where photographers “lend” their framed photos/artwork to various locations (such as restaurants and commercial buildings) in order to get public exposure. The theory is that customers and general public will see the displays and enquire about the artist, and then follow through with interest and/or orders. I see these scenarios as a form of consignment.

I am wondering if anyone has consigned their work to other artists who market their own work in order to get a bigger variety available to the public. For example, a photographer may travel to numerous arts/crafts shows in a season, but doesn’t have a big enough inventory to fill out their display area, so the artist could show the work of other photographers in his area in order to attract more traffic. This can be a mutual benefit, since artwork/photos could be loaned in the other direction as well. This would allow wider coverage and greater exposure in a short selling season, and allow your work to be marketed in many venues on a given weekend (after all, the artist/photographer can be only be at one event at a time, even though he may want to attend a number of them on a given weekend). Reciprocal marketing would allow the other to get the same multi-site exposure as well. Clearly there would have to be a trust relationship, and the participating artists would want to have complementary work.

It is basically consignment without explicitly stated pricing.

Consignment is...well, it sucks. Most artists hate it. Why? Because it's a shotgun approach and it's a real pain to transport items to the consignee (the seller), dealing with expenses incurred with printing, mounting, and framing the work, all without a guarantee of sale. What happens if the photographer does 20-40 framed prints and only one sells? No profit, and likely a significant loss.

The idea that people will be sufficiently interested in the work to contact and later purchase from the artist is a sort of semi-delusional rationalization. It's not that you have to be especially good to sell work this way. It's that the artist has taken on all of the exposure to risk when he or she is pretty much the least likely person to be able to bear it. After all, we're not talking about established, celebrity artists whose name alone sells the work. The whole point of representation is to transfer part of the risk onto a more financially secure party, who is diversified in their offerings. This leaves the artist more free to create as they wish, rather than wasting time and energy stressing over how to be a businessman/salesman, which, if most artists were good at, they would've gone to business school or worked retail. Under consignment, the seller is not particularly motivated to actually sell.

Granted consignment has advantages, too. The artist sets their price and commissions are generally very low. But it's not, in my view, a fair shake. It's a lot like playing poker--how risk-loving/risk-averse you are is partly a function of how much money you have.

And in the case of the restaurant, all the while, the seller reaps clear benefits without incurring any risk.

I have done this in two instances over the past couple of years and in one location I sold exactly one print. The other one was much more successful as the restaurant was trying to build its reputation as a gallery restaurant and it did draw the right kind of people to its establishment. The first person was simply being kind to artists but did no promotion at all. In both cases there was a percentage take if they sold anything on my behalf.

Nobody ever said that being in business was going to be easy. You should not expect to get anything for nothing and then if you do it is a bonus. Trying this approach is simply another form of marketing yourself. If you get your images hung in a restaurant then you need to do some work to get some people out there. What does it cost for a few hundred business cards, not much. Have some printed for this specific venue (the owner may participate nad I would certainly ask) and then hand them out at your day job, get your family to take them to their jobs. Post them wherever you can. Its all about promotion and once you get the people to the venue you have to hope that your work is strong enough to attract some sales.

Certainly there are those that are not going to be to afford or elect not to jump on this idea. In reality the cost of a large print is not all that much, it is the display that costs you the big bucks, and yet we still see framing shops closing up. You have to get creative sometimes. Look where your work will be hung, maybe framing is not the way to go. I've seen displays where the images are simply board mounted or the new thing is the gallery wraps.

I don't see other businesses coming to photographers and paying them to have their work hung in their place of business. You are going to have to bear the cost but nothing ventured, nothing gained.

golfecho wrote in post #8563590
The theory is that customers and general public will see the displays and enquire about the artist, and then follow through with interest and/or orders. I see these scenarios as a form of consignment.

wickerprints wrote in post #8563731
It is basically consignment without explicitly stated pricing.

Although I will not debate that it doesn't work, I will say it doesn't work well. As for marketing methods, it's a poor one because it overlooks one important thing: impulse sales.

If a restaurant visitor sees a great work, they are more likely to impulsively purchase it on the spot as opposed to inquiring about the artist and following up. Ask any gallery owner. It is important to have that work hanging on a wall. If that were not the case, galleries would not have to worry about wall space. They could have wooden shelves filled with catalogs. But the impulse of the buyer who reacts to a framed piece in front of them and who purchases it on the spot is a strong sales tool.

It would be better if the restaurant was agreed and set up to sell the work off the wall. But then on the other hand, as discussed, people whose sole intent at the moment is to fill their bellies are not the same demographic as those who visit galleries. In the former environment, you're trying to sell a product to a person who had no desire whatsoever to buy art when they entered, and the later is the opposite.

ssim wrote in post #8567351
In reality the cost of a large print is not all that much, it is the display that costs you the big bucks...

This is true. Even when using high end fine art rag papers it costs, what, perhaps $5 or 6$ to print a 17" x 25"? It's the framing and matting that costs big bucks.

This is why you need to learn to do it yourself. I was already cutting my own mats with a Logan, but recently learned how to build my own frames.

Even tho I am NOT a woodworker, I was aghast at how easy it is. I buy 9' sticks of beautiful custom moulding, cut, glue and vnail myself. I don't do glass, tho. I have it cut. Even that is surprisingly cheap. My initial investment was about $375 for tools, some of which I now know was not necessary.

The bottom line is that I can now do a complete framing job of a largish piece (25" wide or so) , double-matted, with beautiful ornate molding for probably $20 to $25. And even with this low price, it's done within museum quality specs (acid-free mats, glues, etc.). The same job done by a framing service would be many times more.

This maximizes profits. You're all smart - do the math. You, the artist, pay for the print and framing, but the gallery (or restaurant owner) gets 50% without sharing the expense. After you take your cut and subtract the costs, you have pocket change left over.

So if you are going to sell via this method, utilize the impulse buy reaction and allow the restaurant owner to sell on the spot and do it all yourself to maximize your profits.

There is another risk the photographer takes with consignment - the risk of loss if the establishment goes out of business or suffers some type of catastrophic loss, theft, etc.

If a business goes under, their creditors can claim rights to your photos unless you protect yourself with certain UCC filings, depending on the law where you are. It has happened in galleries.

What about theft? Fire? So even though you may think it is just consignment, maybe no big deal, I would have some form of contract or memorandum of understanding with the proprietor to protect yourself.

I've got some pictures hanging in the waiting room of a local Volvo dealership (a very crunchy granola kind of place actually) down the street, and have not sold a single picture.

On the other hand, I've gotten 2 paying gigs out of having my name + contact info up on the wall, which were worth a lot more than any sale I might have made.

Go figure [Shrug].

Well, my real question is whether a photographer who sets up a sales booth at an arts/crafts fair should consider being a consignment agent for fellow photographers who could not attend.

I have photos of Pennsylvania and Europe, but nothing from California or other places. I could widen my inventory choices by selling another photographer's products at my booth.

I in turn may want to market my Pennsylvania stuff out west (where there is little chance I would ever get a chance to set up a booth anywhere) through a photographer out there.

I guess I'm kicking around the idea of a photographer's marketing outlet group. Again, wondering about the pros/cons of such a marketing idea . . . photographers selling their own and other's work.