The Six Most Common Mistakes Artists Make When Approaching Galleries
J. Jason Horejs, owner of Scottdale's Xanadu Gallery has published a book titled "Starving" to Successful | The Artist's Guide to Getting into Galleries and Selling More Art.
This book was written "to help you approach galleries in an organized, systematic and professional way." The book will also help artists avoid the six mistakes listed below.
I'll try to get a copy of this book and review it here, but meanwhile you can order the book here and below are the six most common mistakes according to Jason:
This book springs from my experiences with artists. Several years ago, I began to wonder why artists were inept talking to galleries. I quickly realized most were unsuccessful because there is very little information explaining the best strategies.Jason tells me that you may order the book at the pre-publication price of $19.50 (Plus s+h) through 8/25. The first printing is already 3/4 sold out. Learn more about the book and order your copy today at www.xanadugallery.com/book
That lack of information leads to these blunders:
Mistake #1: Presenting an inconsistent body of work.
Artists generally love their freedom. They want to experiment. They love a challenge. They crave variety. All good things, except when you are presenting your work to a gallery.
The work you present to a gallery needs to be unified. It doesn't need to be repetitive or formulaic, but it must present you as a consistent artist with a clear vision.
Often I feel I am looking at the work of multiple artists as I review a single portfolio. To avoid this problem you need to find focus in your work.
If you work in several media and a variety of styles, focus on just one for the next 6-12 months. Create a body of work that feels like a "series". Once you have 20-25 gallery-ready pieces in this series, you will be ready to approach a gallery.
You can further create consistency by presenting the work in a consistent way. Use similar frames for paintings and photographs, similar bases for sculpture, similar settings for artistic jewelry. Make it very clear all of the work is by the same artist.
If you simply can't rein your style in, consider creating multiple portfolios, one for each style.
Don't confuse the galleries you approach with multiple styles in your portfolio.
Mistake #2: Producing insufficient work to sustain gallery sales.
Many artists create marketable work, but in quantities too low to make a gallery relationship viable. Successful artists are consistently in the studio creating artwork. You may be surprised to learn the results of a recent survey I conducted.
I asked artists how many new works they created in the last twelve months. Painters responded that on average they were creating 53 pieces every twelve months. Sculptors 31. Glass artists 500!
A gallery owner needs to feel confident you will replace sold art quickly and maintain high quality. They want to know if you are successful the can replenish their inventory.
Don't despair if you are far from reaching this goal. Rather, look at your creative production for the last year and set a goal to increase the production by 25% in the next 12 months.
Several suggestions to increase your productivity:
1. Dedicate time daily to your art. Maybe your schedule will only allow for two hours daily, but you will produce more by working for those two hours every day than you will by waiting for big blocks of time.
Treat your studio time as sacred. Train your family and friends to respect that time. You don't interrupt them when they are at work; ask them the same courtesy when you are in the studio.
2. Set a production goal. If I could tell you the secret to producing 50, or 100 pieces per year, would you listen? Here it is: create 1 or 2 pieces per week.
I know it seems overly simple, yet few artists work in a concerted disciplined way to achieve this goal.
(A common objection I hear to this suggestion is that quality will suffer if an artist works this quickly. In my experience, the opposite is true. A certain level of quality may only be obtained by putting miles on the paintbrush, spending hours in the darkroom, moving tons of clay or stone.)
3. Remove distractions from the studio. Move your computer to another room. Unplug the telephone. Nothing kills an artist's focus faster than the constant interruption of technology. Your inbox and voicemail will keep your messages safe while you work.
Mistake #3: Delivering a portfolio in a format inconvenient for gallery review.
Often your portfolio is your only chance to show your work to a gallery owner. Poorly formatted portfolios are rarely viewed. Your portfolio should be concise, simple, informative and accessible.
25 years ago, formatting a portfolio was simple. A portfolio was either a literal portfolio with sheet protectors and photos, or a slide sheet.
The choices have since multiplied. CD? Digital hardbound photo-book? Pdf file? Email? Which format is the most effective? None of these, actually. Each has drawbacks limiting effectiveness. They are either too much work for the gallery owner to access, too easy to delete, or too hard for you to maintain.
In my book I will show an example of a perfect portfolio. Easy to maintain, easy to share. Successful.
A couple of things to keep in mind with your portfolio:1. Your portfolio should contain no more than 20-25 of your most recent works. You should not create an all-inclusive portfolio. A gallery owner does not want to see your life's work. They want to see your best, most current, most relevant work.
2. On each page you should include pertinent, relevant information about the art. Include the title, the medium, the size, and the price. Don't include the date of artwork creation.
3. Place your bio, artist's statement, and resume at the back of the portfolio, not the beginning. Your artwork is the most important feature of the portfolio, don't bury it behind your info. Limit press clippings, and magazine articles to 2-3 pages.
4. Include 2-3 images of sold artwork. You should try to include at least one photo of your artwork installed. These images will establish your credibility more rapidly than any resume ever could.
In "Starving" to Successful I will teach you how to create a powerful portfolio. Your new portfolio will end up in gallery owner's hands, rather than in the garbage can.
Mistake #4: Lacking confidence and consistency in pricing.
One of the greatest challenges facing you as an artist is knowing how to correctly value your work. Many artists price their work emotionally, and inconsistently. Galleries can't sell wrongly priced art.
Worse, nothing will betray an unprepared artist like not knowing how to price his/her work.
Many artists mistakenly under-price their work. They do this because they feel they are not established. They do it because their local art market won't sustain higher prices. They do it because they lack confidence in their work.
In the book I will help you come up with a consistent, systematic formula for pricing your art.
Is your work priced correctly?
Mistake #5: Approaching the wrong galleries.
My gallery is located in an art market dominated by Southwest and Western subject matter. My gallery stands apart from most of the galleries in Arizona because I have chosen art outside the norms. Yet I am constantly contacted by Western and Southwestern artists. They seem surprised and hurt when I turn them away. They could have saved us both some discomfort by researching my gallery before approaching.
Which markets should you approach first? How should you research the galleries? Is it safe to work with galleries in out-of-state markets?
"Starving" to Successful will teach you how to create a list of qualified, appropriate galleries to contact (I will also teach you how to approach them).
Mistake #6: Submitting art through the wrong channels.
Conventional wisdom, and even some highly respected art marketing books will advise you to send your portfolio with a cover letter to the gallery. You may also hear it's best to call a gallery and try to make an appointment to meet the owner. You might visit a gallery's website to learn of their submission guidelines.
In my experience, these methods all guarantee failure. I will share with you a more direct, simpler approach; this approach will tremendously improve your chances of success. The approach is no secret, and yet most artists don't employ it.
Find the solutions to avoiding all these mistakes in the pages of "Starving" to Successful.
In addition to learning how to avoid the mistakes listed above,"Starving" Artist to Successful Artist you will also see clearly how to effectively organize your work, build your brand as an artist, communicate effectively with your galleries, and much more.
I will give you concrete steps you can take to systematically prepare for gallery relationships.
Please email Jason directly, jason@xanadugallery.com, or call him toll-free at the gallery at 866.483.1306 if you have any questions about the book.
I am interested in your thoughts about these six mistakes, which I think are dead on target. As a gallerist I have encountered (and continue to see) all of them. I'm going to think about six separate mistakes of my own experience as a gallerist and art dealer in dealing with artists and post these here soon. Meanwhile, post your thoughts or experiences in the comments section or email them to me.
8 comments:
Very useful info, especially #2. I think a lot of artists with full time other jobs do not realize that an art career is possible with very good time management, 3 hours here, 2 hours there, and of course a lot of work on the weekends. Of course, you may end up using 99% of any work vacation time towards the art career, but when it pays off, it is worth it.
CAC
Artists without a large body of series-style work, instead just a few strong pieces, might try looking at MOCA DC (www.mocadc.org). We have monthly shows and are always looking for new local artists.
Come visit on Sept. 4 for our next opening, "Perspectives of Women"!
-Julia
I must disagree, Lenny. Many of Jason's points are flawed on face. To whit:
#1
This is typical of an "old school" approach to art that’s long-gone. Artists these days (since the 60’s) are working in what Rosalind Krausss called the "Post-Medium Condition, i.e., they aren't held to a single media. Certainly an intelligent gallery needs to catch-up & learn to spot the unifying reasoning or theory behind the work. Would a gallery “pass” on Gerhard Richter if he walked in with his 3-4 (at least) different styles of work?
#2:
It is sad that galleries are so mercenary but there have to be other ways to maintain financial sustainability than asking artists to "crank out" more of the same work. Isn’t that formulaic & does it not weaken the art? What about charging admission for performances, installations or even entry to a gallery as ways to approach solvency?
#3 & #4
Perhaps...but so boring.
#5 & #6
Jason's "answers" to these are so self-serving (“buy my book”) that it reveals a disingenuousness that makes me regret reading the post.
Artists & gallerist need to wake-up to the fact that the world has changed. We're beyond the traditional ways of making, presenting, representing & selling art. Get out of the commodity box!
Hi Mark...
A classical disagreement of theory and practice!
How delicious!
More later...
Hi Mark...
As promised, more on your comments:
For #1 - It is an "old school" approach to art - in that you are right.
But it is NOT an "old school" approach to exhibiting and selling art in a commercial gallery. Let me explain.
Even before the 60s artists had been working in many media... in fact one can easily see in Picasso's career how a multi-talented artist like Pablo mastered so many media and re-invented his style every few decades? Artist should always be willing to explore and re-invent themselves and explore, explore, explore: style, media, ideas, genres, etc.
That is NOT the point of #1!
Here's the key to his #1: "Artists generally love their freedom. They want to experiment. They love a challenge. They crave variety. All good things, except when you are presenting your work to a gallery."
Don't forget the "artist" that he is talking about, not a Richter or a Picasso, with a long, established and envied career, but an unknown, emerging artist hoping to convince one commercial gallery owner to spend the time, effort and money to represent him/her and give that artist a solo show and representation.
Can anyone visualize that first solo show? Hoping to establish the first foot print for that emerging artist in that gallery? Visualize a solo show showcasing a couple of stripe paintings, a few drip paintings, several classical nude studies, three narrative glass pieces and four glass bowls, six abstract etchings and four Japanese Ukiyo-e woodblocks?
The critics would kill the artist ("Jack of all trades, master of none") and the collectors would scratch their heads.
Ahhh... this happened by the way.
The key that you missed is that while artists should ALWAYS explore styles and media and genres, etc. is that when they first approach a commercial art dealer for a consideration for a solo show, they must ALWAYS present a cohesive body of works as the offering, and then later on as the relationship develops, ALWAYS include the gallerist in the loop about the other works.
Your Richter example doesn't work in this case. Of course no gallery would pass on Richter with his many varied styles. NOW as in today, that is, after Richter already has a name that is practically unrivaled. But if instead of Gerhardt, this was Larry Richter from Topeka, Kansas, then the answer is that all gallerists would rightly so, pass on him.
More on the others later... this sounds like a fun topic to have a debate on.
Warm regards,
Lenny
Lenny, my good friend:
Let me play "Devil's Advocate" here a bit. What you're suggesting then is that an artist should “compromise” their work when approaching galleries. That is, in order to present a "cohesive body of works," they should edit out anything that's different or out-of-place from what THEY (the artist) perceive as possibly "cohesive."
What we're talking about here is a "body of works" that look alike, sometimes referred to as a "series." This raises a couple of intriguing questions (perhaps not exactly on topic but I can't resist…) including whether serial work is research-based, i.e., seeks to explore visuality through themes/variations to achieve an “end;” or is simply driven by the commercial preferences of the art market. Why show 10 Rothko's if you can get him to make 200 more?
The other question relates to curatorial practice in two sub-tangents: first, does the (young) artist have enough grasp of history, his/her own position in the trajectory of art, to make such curatorial decisions? And does the gallerist select artists based on what they bring in or what they “might” produce later on? That is to say, does the gallerist select work that’s “like” what’s being shown in other galleries in order to develop the artist’s name?
And I think it is still possible that a gallery might pass on Richter, even today, if he was an unknown. Don’t forget the 1863 Salon passed on Manet!
Hi Mark...
Let me think on those points, but a quick and immediate answer to one issue: If Richter was an unknown... and showed up to most galleries today with his body of works as it stands now.... mmmmm... most galleries would probably pass on him, although I would pick his realistic works from the amazing and diverse range that he has!
But I suspect that if we study Richter's progression through the gallery world, we'll see steady "serials" of cohesive work for a while... before he "switches" to a new area of interest.
More later
Thanks for posting, I'm enjoying the comments, all good points. Have you read the book yet? I agree with Mark, also a bit concerned about the strong sales pitch in the final 2 points.
One thing I'm wondering is how the state of the art scene in this economy effects chances of getting a gallery. I've been doing most of the 6 recommendations already, but I see galleries closing and it feels like an extra competitive field at the moment. I like the young galleries I'm seeing, breaking rules, but my work doesn't really fit in that scene either.
Following your blog, Lenny.
Post a Comment