This was an interesting piece Tom. I'm always wondering what the special sauce is that makes some work sell, and other work sit on the shelf (or the wall). A thing I've definitely noticed in my own work is that when I try and analyse why a print of mine sold well, and create something new on that basis, it invariably falls flat. Trying to produce commercial work, as outlined in the Baldessari painting, is (at least for me) a non-starter, as I'm sure was his feeling in making that piece.
I have a pet formula for art which is: capturing/sharing experience + invention/inspiration/original thought. For me, the IDEA is king. Maybe something of that is important not just in making art but also in making art that sells.
As an illustrator myself, I'm not sure I agree that illustration contests 'trivialise' the profession. Illustration certainly is a profession, but drawing is also something lots of people who aren't illustrators do in their spare time, for fun. Some other things, like singing, are similar - do Pop Idol contests trivialise the profession of singing? I'm not sure, but it doesn't feel like it to me. It feels like they might help encourage people to bridge the gap between dabbling and deciding to make a career of it. But I hadn't really thought about it til I read your piece, so I'm not sure :)
Hi Joe, thanks for your comments. I 100% relate to the experience of making art thinking "this has to sell well" only for it to be my worst-selling piece.
You're onto something with your pet formula. I have also observed that artists who sell well develop a following around something they do in a focused, consistent way first. Whatever else they do in their broader practice, they stay in a more narrow track with their "popular" work, because it has become a product and a brand. People want more of the same thing, a little bit new but not a lot.
Good point about the trivializing nature of contests. I would only argue that illustration is different than Pop Idol contests in how the contest operator intends on using the work. If they're basically crowdsourcing illustration instead of hiring a professional to do the work, this to me is basically "art mining", which exploits eager or desperate artists. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to work with the kind of client that would want to see hundreds of options to choose from anyway.
I admit that that the contest in question is not exactly equivalent to a real illustration project, it's more a fan art contest, and in that sense, it may not be as exploitative as this.
p.s. I checked out your work — really great stuff!
This was an interesting piece Tom. I'm always wondering what the special sauce is that makes some work sell, and other work sit on the shelf (or the wall). A thing I've definitely noticed in my own work is that when I try and analyse why a print of mine sold well, and create something new on that basis, it invariably falls flat. Trying to produce commercial work, as outlined in the Baldessari painting, is (at least for me) a non-starter, as I'm sure was his feeling in making that piece.
I have a pet formula for art which is: capturing/sharing experience + invention/inspiration/original thought. For me, the IDEA is king. Maybe something of that is important not just in making art but also in making art that sells.
As an illustrator myself, I'm not sure I agree that illustration contests 'trivialise' the profession. Illustration certainly is a profession, but drawing is also something lots of people who aren't illustrators do in their spare time, for fun. Some other things, like singing, are similar - do Pop Idol contests trivialise the profession of singing? I'm not sure, but it doesn't feel like it to me. It feels like they might help encourage people to bridge the gap between dabbling and deciding to make a career of it. But I hadn't really thought about it til I read your piece, so I'm not sure :)
Hi Joe, thanks for your comments. I 100% relate to the experience of making art thinking "this has to sell well" only for it to be my worst-selling piece.
You're onto something with your pet formula. I have also observed that artists who sell well develop a following around something they do in a focused, consistent way first. Whatever else they do in their broader practice, they stay in a more narrow track with their "popular" work, because it has become a product and a brand. People want more of the same thing, a little bit new but not a lot.
Good point about the trivializing nature of contests. I would only argue that illustration is different than Pop Idol contests in how the contest operator intends on using the work. If they're basically crowdsourcing illustration instead of hiring a professional to do the work, this to me is basically "art mining", which exploits eager or desperate artists. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to work with the kind of client that would want to see hundreds of options to choose from anyway.
I admit that that the contest in question is not exactly equivalent to a real illustration project, it's more a fan art contest, and in that sense, it may not be as exploitative as this.
p.s. I checked out your work — really great stuff!