|
|
Post by volvic on Nov 24, 2011 8:09:11 GMT -8
Im picking my pop up book in person in NYC on the 5th or 6th of december.
|
|
|
|
Post by ricosg11 on Nov 24, 2011 9:59:42 GMT -8
i got to see the pop up book in person last weekend. Really cool. I hadn't planned on purchasing one, but think I will.
|
|
|
|
Post by alsbabar on Nov 27, 2011 3:39:42 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by sleepboy on Dec 4, 2011 5:55:15 GMT -8
Finally saw these at the Art Basel fair person and they were pretty nice. |
|
|
|
Post by wimbledongreen on Dec 5, 2011 20:15:30 GMT -8
Regarding the Topo and Distortion prints released in September: I wish Paulson Bott wasn't so aggressive with their price increasing ($2500 up to $4500 within about a month's time). I wanted to wait and see the prints in person at the NY Print Fair since I knew Paulson Bott would have a booth there so didn't jump on the releases (and obviously didn't expect the quick price increases). Seeing artwork in person can be a different experience from seeing them in a jpeg. And since these were something new from the artist I wanted to experience them in person first. Unless you got a sneak peek at these at Paulson Bott there's no way to know what to expect. This is the opposite of, say, a Shepard Fairey print where the technique is the same from week to week when he releases a new print so you already know what to expect.
Sure enough the prints I thought I would like the best ended up not looking good to me. But the ones I had no interest at first looked great in person. I would have been very disappointed if I had purchased the print I thought I liked the most just from the jpegs. But a price hike of $2500 when first announced in September to $4500 at the NY Print Fair in early November is worse than the Fairey flippers so I had to pass.
My plea to Paulson Bott: please stop flipping your own prints with pricing tiers. It forces everyone to purchase first and look later if you want the initial price. This reduces buying art to the similar act of purchasing stock in an ipo and hoping it goes-goes-goes. It allows no room for the art to be seen and experienced before bought. Unless this is what the artists and print publishers want and it really is just about moving prints and making sales.
|
|
|
|
Post by parklife2 on Dec 5, 2011 22:49:30 GMT -8
Pricing tiers for editions existed long before Paulson. It's how the business of editions works. Like it or not. Calling it Flipping is just incorrect.
though it does suck that the prices jumped before the edition was even delivered..that's just the reality of the market for a hot artist like Tauba.
People definitely took a leap of faith buying these things sight unseen.
|
|
|
|
Post by afroken on Dec 5, 2011 23:27:46 GMT -8
out of interest, which ones did you and didn't you love in person?
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyphresh on Dec 6, 2011 8:39:50 GMT -8
Does anyone know if all of the Paulson Bott editions are sold through the tiered pricing structure or is it just Tauba? I'd imagine all of their editions are sold this way. They made it very clear this was how these etchings were going to be sold. I just recently pulled the trigger on a Half Times a Half etching, so a majority of customers who purchased these before me got them cheaper, just the way the cookie crumbled. I liked the etching enough to spend that extra amount, knowing the piece was coming straight from the source vs. searching for one on the secondary.
|
|
|
|
Post by svenman on Dec 6, 2011 8:58:21 GMT -8
Does anyone know if all of the Paulson Bott editions are sold through the tiered pricing structure or is it just Tauba? I'd imagine all of their editions are sold this way. They made it very clear this was how these etchings were going to be sold. I just recently pulled the trigger on a Half Times a Half etching, so a majority of customers who purchased these before me got them cheaper, just the way the cookie crumbled. I liked the etching enough to spend that extra amount, knowing the piece was coming straight from the source vs. searching for one on the secondary. i think it's all of their editions. as said above, it's reasonably common practice to do this with editions. personally i don't like it either. it does feel like you are being scalped by the publisher knowing you paid a higher price for a manufactured item than someone who bought one a week before. secondary market i understand, but primary, i think its an unethical practice. |
|
|
|
Post by rizza79 on Dec 6, 2011 9:09:20 GMT -8
obviously the tiered pricing is a business decision to maximize the sales for artist and publisher, but it would make the most sense for them to just figure out the gross they need and average that out over the edition. in the end it would be the same.
on the other hand, this model can sort of be looked at as a marketing tactic as well. it pushes any interested collectors to buy early so they feel like they are getting a deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by ricosg11 on Dec 6, 2011 11:36:41 GMT -8
But these started at $2500 correct, these 5 new prints by tauba, if all sold at $2500 would bring in close to half a million dollars. If that isn't enough to pay their rent up them all to $3000 and keep it there. I am well aware of the work that goes into producing prints but half a million is not chump change either. And Paulson isn't exactly having their stuff flipped left and right. And if they hold a few back then they have a little nest egg themselves in those instances. The 75% of other prints that don't sell out probably would have a better chance of doing so if priced more fairly and not tiered. If you ask me moving your inventory is a better strategy than sitting on it and fretting over whether or not you've squeezed as much profit as possible out of each and every print and worrying that someone might make a profit on your print in the secondary. Agree a million percent. I passed, at my own detriment, due to the increase in price over the pixel prints. I love them and have two framed on my wall, but I sure as hell wasn't forking over an extra $1000 to get the new ones. They do look gorgeous on screen though. Can't win em all. |
|
|
|
Post by rizza79 on Dec 6, 2011 11:46:54 GMT -8
I'm pretty sure anyone who purchased the prints educated themselves on the process and amount of work that went into producing them.
As far as print makers in general not making money..... Why in the world would someone open a business that doesn't make any money? Its all great and dandy to do something you love, but that is not possible to sustain for any time period if it is not profitable. Let's not sugar coat something to be something other than what it is. Print publishers definitely make money. Some printers essentially print money. If they don't they don't stay in business.
I understand these etchings have a lot of care and effort into them, but at the end of the day Paulson and Tauba sat down before going forward and hashed out an agreement in terms of the numbers. I would guess they would not have done the project if it were not worthwhile.
|
|
|
|
Post by svenman on Dec 6, 2011 13:26:18 GMT -8
i'm sure it's VERY worthwhile for both publisher and artist.
These things are wonderful, and i like Paulson a lot, but no matter what is said, hiking prices during editions will never sit comfortably in my mind. it's old school art establishment practice though and the ability to make more money will never not be exploited by sassy publishers.
|
|
|
|
Post by solar77 on Dec 6, 2011 18:08:57 GMT -8
Got my pop up book today. I didn't realize quite how huge and heavy it was going to be. Very impressive!
|
|
avert
Full Member
Posts: 179
|
Post by avert on Dec 6, 2011 18:39:17 GMT -8
paulson has built a relationship with tauba that goes back to at least 2004-2005. they're doing a ton of work on these prints. it's not just tauba walking in, hitting print on a digital file, and paulson and tauba laughing all the way to the bank. keep in mind, not all of her prints have flown out the door as these ones have. the demand for her work is so strong right now that the tiered price change is happening at a lightning fast rate. other print sets sell slower, and thus the price changes are not seen on a daily, weekly, or monthly time-line. and as parklife2 said, not all editions even get to the tiered price point. this is how it's done, and how it's been done.... all over the world...... for a very long time. it has nothing to do with "exploiting" or "sassy publishers". that's just rude thing to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by rizza79 on Dec 7, 2011 0:30:57 GMT -8
avert...are you speaking for Paulson as a spokesperson?
i don't understand how people don't see this as business. tauba is in demand. Paulson is savvy. the end result is a healthy profit off of some etchings from the artist.
|
|
|
|
Post by mose on Dec 7, 2011 4:19:52 GMT -8
I have to agree with Avert. This is a very standard process and hits, of which there are generally few, help offset slow-sellers, of which there are many, and allow publishers to stay in business. It's the same way with proper galleries. A couple of whale patrons, or a couple of star artists, float and support the entire program which may never turn a profit as a whole.
Nothing particularly savvy about it. Proper fine art prints generally have a rather long production process, tend to be very labor intensive and tend to move slowly, not like the supersonic sell-outs seen in the urban/street contemporary art mess. This is very different from the 'output digital file, burn screen, pull, pull, pull' of a Shepard Fairey or a Banksy, etc.
I find it odd, and a little sad, that many begrugde Paulson on this issue, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. But think about this, how many other Paulson prints are you planning to purchase?
|
|
|
|
Post by svenman on Dec 7, 2011 6:25:28 GMT -8
i'm not trying to be rude. i have a lot of respect for paulson, and they have been great to deal with on a personal level.
i'm talking about the accepted practice of price tiers designed to prompt hype and panic buying amongst consumers, whilst making the maximum amount of money from such an edition. it's an old art establishment tactic, thankfully that doesn't make too frequent an appearance within the scene / artists that are largely discussed here.
i'd always be reluctant to buy at what i consider an inflated price for anything. maybe i have a natural aversion to feeling like i've had my trousers taken down.
i'd be interested if those that feel this is ok are happy with the equivalent practice (in my eyes) of marking original pieces POA and offering it to what is essentailly the highest bidder.
|
|
|
|
Post by harveyn on Dec 7, 2011 7:09:07 GMT -8
I agree 100% with your thoughts on this sven. Also bugs me when prints are released pre-production with the following caveat "These are sold pre-fabrication and will be ready to ship end of xxxxxx. Please note the print may differ slightly from the display image" Surely people, buying art for the love of it should not be buying anything unseen even if the variation is slight. Also galleries should not be selling art that has not even been produced even if it is just a screenprint. For me this says as much about the gallery and its target clientele as its does about the collector. Helps cash flow I guess with no burden on working capital....  i'm not trying to be rude. i have a lot of respect for paulson, and they have been great to deal with on a personal level. i'm talking about the accepted practice of price tiers designed to prompt hype and panic buying amongst consumers, whilst making the maximum amount of money from such an edition. it's an old art establishment tactic, thankfully that doesn't make too frequent an appearance within the scene / artists that are largely discussed here. i'd always be reluctant to buy at what i consider an inflated price for anything. maybe i have a natural aversion to feeling like i've had my trousers taken down. i'd be interested if those that feel this is ok are happy with the equivalent practice (in my eyes) of marking original pieces POA and offering it to what is essentailly the highest bidder. |
|
|
|
Post by sin on Dec 8, 2011 8:47:32 GMT -8
The pop up came in today. Will send pics out shortly.
|
|
|
|
Post by sin on Dec 8, 2011 11:32:21 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by fnord on Dec 8, 2011 11:50:17 GMT -8
Wow those are very cool. What's the [2,3] on the covermean? 2d,3d?
Edit: just read the product description and yep that's exactly what it means
|
|
|
|
Post by gilsteph on Dec 8, 2011 12:01:29 GMT -8
Amazing! Cant wait for my copy to arrive!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by epicfai on Dec 8, 2011 12:37:57 GMT -8
these look like a lot of fun sin. love your pictures. how sturdy/fragile are those pop-up sculptures? i'd almost be afraid to pop them open too often.
|
|
|
|
Post by sin on Dec 8, 2011 13:30:22 GMT -8
they are relatively sturdy (i'm a bit worried as well)
the ball piece actually came apart when i opened it but i was able to put the two pieces back together with no issue.
i was under the permission that the middle piece in the stacked box piece was supposed to open but based on other shots ive seen i believe i was wrong
|
|
