Hey - Was That A Door You Just Slammed in My Face?

I don't know how many of you saw the post by Jack White on the Fine Arts View Blog last week, but it's worth the read, including the back and forth in the comments between several industry heavy weights.  It was like watching the Casey Anthony trial on cable, either you hate her or pity her or wonder why you care - except it's so damn compelling. 

Why advertise? 

Well, at some point you feel like you need to show your art to other people, people beyond your immediate sphere of influence.  In 2006, before the crash, I shared an ad with a gallery in a locally published glossy lifestyle magazine.  At this time Central Oregon housing prices were increasing faster than those in any other metropolitan statistical area in the nation because of the resources here, the life style, and people couldn't wait to plunk down their money on new homes and furnish them with fine art.  That ad cost me half the amount of a group ad in one of the national art magazines, reached a fraction of the demographics, but they were the right demographics for the times.  We sold the artwork featured.

But.  There's always a but and in this case the bottom fell out, magazines faded, galleries closed, and home prices dropped by fifty percent.  I still advertise. And here's why.

Last week I received an email through the contact form of my FASO website, which is always featured in my print ads. The couple wanted to tell me they had just purchased one of my paintings.  They were thrilled, they had been following my work for some time in an art magazine, and felt honored to have obtained one of my paintings, so could I tell them something about it?

The title did not sound familiar.  I emailed back suggesting that perhaps they were thinking of another artist with a name similar to mine.  No, they replied, the signature is very clear: Sue Smith.  And they repeated, they had been following my work for some time in the art magazine, and were thrilled to have finally obtained a Sue Smith painting. 

Could you send me an image then, I suggested, since it was always possible someone was reselling an early painting and had changed the title. 

The image was of a lovely painting.  The signature looked like mine, but then, I have a very common name.  I told them it was lovely, I was sorry to disappoint them but did not paint it, and offered to send them a small study I thought they would enjoy in appreciation for their interest in my work.  They, too, were disappointed, but thrilled once again to have two Sue Smith paintings. 

Advertising.  In the back-and-forth between Jack White, Eric Rhoads, Clint Watson and Barney Davey there was a lot of talk about artists with unrealistic expectations, artists not being strong enough for the big leagues, or the inability of print ads to generate sufficient results.  All true. 

But please don't slam the door on the idea of artists advertising before you consider this.

Advertising is a requirement for membership in one respected national artist organization that I belong to, and as such, members receive attractive rates and award support at the national shows. By advertising, the artist not only supports the organization, but supports others in the industry who in turn support us, and we all achieve a level of credibility in the eyes of the buying public.  As for the demographics argument, it was first suggested to me to apply for membership in this organization by a Gallery that subsequently went on to represent my work - until they closed as a result of the bursting housing bubble.

When I place an ad with one of the major art magazines, they send me pre-publication complimentary copies of the magazine.  I forward half of these on to the gallery that currently represents me so they can then make contact with clients who have previously purchased my work.  The gallery has a reason to touch bases with client, the quality of the magazine reaffirms the client's good decision to buy my art, and perhaps the gallery can generate another sale.  I also send out copies to people who contact me - permissive marketing, as Clint Watson would say - like the couple who had purchased the painting that wasn't mine.

And so for me the argument comes down to this: Overcoming buyer's remorse both before and after the sale is one of the major obstacles no matter what your industry.  But it's far easier to demonstrate your credibility as an artist through other sources than your own braggadocio. 

Print advertising can do this.  In our area, and perhaps in yours, the economy has eliminated most of the local or regional magazines that could be used to communicate with potential clients. Mailing lists, newsletters, free publicity - well, these seem more "self promoting" as far as the credibility factor goes.  But having someone else - say, a magazine writing an article in conjunction with a national show - that puts a little more weight in the credibility bucket from my perspective and seems like an acceptable reason to participate.  So what if I pay for the ad and get the mention in the article? At least with print advertising I know that the person who bought the magazine wanted to look at it and will probably keep it around for a few weeks or months.  The postcard -  which I paid for, wrote the copy for, and mailed out - might not even make it past the recycle bin in the garage. 

So all in all Jack White's post produced an interesting debate, if only because it felt - at times -  like they were all talking about some lofty artist world, in the same way politicians talk about flyover country,  as if we're all just like those inside the beltway.  And in many ways they are right. There are segments within the art hierarchy, and understanding where your work places you is essential.  You don't place yourself there - the quality, creativity, passion, and connectedness of your artwork in the public mind places you there. And for many artists this can be painful. Whether justified pain or not.

If you are like me, you may have found Jack's initial premise, and the subsequent back and forth, somewhat disheartening, particularly the part about most artists not being strong enough to participate in the larger dialogue. 

But I would urge you to go back and read through the information carefully.  Think about the reasons why you might choose to advertise.  Think about ideas I've posed here.

And get back to creating art.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

[John Groth]

Sue, as you stated advertising can be a variety of methods to get your work in front of the public.

Used to do a wide range of craft and art shows. One in particular, had two excellent western artists. To my untrained eye the work of one had more detail and color and he usually was voted best of show. Both had the same size booths and the shows were small enough that location had little influence on sales. Yet the artist who did not win best of show outsold the other by 3 to 5 times. (Everyone paid commission and I had access to the figures.)

Why was this happening? The biggest seller talked to the customers, found out what they liked, told them stories on each piece and in a word-advertised his product and talent. (As a aside he usually went home after a three day show with a pocket full of orders and possible future business-one one occasion over $30,000 for original paintings to decorate an attorney's offices.) The best in show sat in the back of his booth with his arms folded daring anyone to talk to him.

So advertising can take many forms-in this example-being personable, asking questions to determine the customers interests and telling compelling stories about the art. One artist went home with customers as friends, his banker loved him while the other complained about the economy and how stupid people were not to recognize his talent.

[sue smith]

Thanks, Barney, I'm looking forward to reading your take on advertising. Of course the real elephant in the room is the fact that for many artists, their buyers have disappeared, and until those people come back into the market there is little an artist can do through any marketing activity that will generate a jump in sales. The strategy has to be one of keeping some skin in the game, while taking advantage of the time to work on the quality of the artwork produced, so that when the buyers return the artist will be ready for them.

[Barney Davey]

Hi Sue, Thanks for linking to my http://www.ArtPrintIssues.com blog in your comments. I did weigh in with some thoughts, but didn't truly engage in the dialogue because I found it exhausting to read, much less be active in a back and forth. Available time to do so also was a major factor.

I am very happy you have offered your own sage insights into the debate. While Jack is authoritative and convincing, he also is not typical of most artists. Just starting with having $150k to throw at print advertising in 18 months cuts him from the herd.

I do think there is value in print advertising, as you have shown how. This is especially true if it is done consistently, and, with this caveat, in concert with other coordinated marketing efforts.

I would advise my Phoenix area neighbor, Amy Tuso, that a single ad is nearly impossible to justify from an ROI investment. It's really hard to recoup the investment. However, if it is part of an overarching campaign that includes email, snail mail/postcards, publicity, press releases, social media, perhaps Pay-per-click and out-of-the-box creative marketing. It then becomes a center piece of something where the sum of the parts are greater than the whole.

It has been on my mind to write my own response to the debate on FASO. Your post has given that impulse added impetus!

[sue smith]

One of my favorite quotes comes from Ian Roberts's book Creative Authenticity:

"I meet artists who talk about the importance of marketing and getting their style right and so on. When I look at their work the main thought I have is, don't worry about getting this stuff out into the world. Stay home and paint - a lot!Work through some stuff first. You can see the work isn't ready for presentation. And the fact that the artist does not realize that is as much the problem as that it isn't ready. A mature sense of critical judgement of our own work is vitally important in developing work for galleries."

It's a question I ask myself each time I consider a newsletter or postcard or ad. Most of the time, I worry that I shouldn't be thinking about marketing at all and should get back to painting. But then, I also believe in leaps of faith.

[sue smith]

Clint - Thank you for your comment. I have learned much through your efforts on behalf of all artists, and I actually appreciated Jack's point of view, as well as the back and forth that went on. As Amy pointed out in her reply, for many artists the decision to advertise, or promote through other media, is an act of faith in the art they produce. Sometimes this act of faith can be misplaced, and certainly the expectation that with one or two expensive ads an artist will have it made is unrealistic.

I wanted to point out that there may be very specific reasons for an artist to decide to place an ad - primarily the creation of a printed ad in a magazine that can then be used as a promotional tool. There's a grain of truth in the adage that it matters who your friends are. For artists looking for something specific, their inclusion with a group of other talented artists might have value to them and be worth the money.

It's important to acknowledge the many parts to a successful "marketing" effort. Putting your work where the buyer's "eyes" are can be achieved through many channels. A modest print ad in the magazines that might be available to artists ought to still be considered as part of the mix. And for those of us, like me, who have watched the local and regional magazines disappear from the scene, the national publications are our only choice.

[Clint Watson]

Sue - great article. I certainly didn't mean to slam the door to advertising, I have seen it work for some artists and, particularly for galleries. I've also seen a lot of people waste a lot of money on it, so I do think it's good to be realistic.

There do now, with the Internet, seem to be more promotional options for artists that can be more effective, especially for the cost. So while Jack and I slightly disagree (I think print ads can sometimes work) - I think he's got a point too. FOr most artists, especially when starting out with marketing, I would probably do other things first.

[Amy Tuso]

Thank you for expressing your thoughts about Jack White's article. I read, re-read and read it out loud to my husband who happens to be a partner in my studio.
As an emerging artist the costs of advertising take a major jump of faith in myself and my art...which I have faith in! I, too, have been blessed with being associated with some major artists/virtual galleries and have shared advertising with them for years.
This summer I will be advertising in Phoenix Home and Garden for the first time as I live in the valley and know there are potential collector's in my area that don't know me.
White's article had me rethinking my current marketing plan and you know what...the slamming of that door is now the sound of it opening.
Amy Tuso
AT Studio
Fountain Hills, AZ
http://www.amytuso.com