Art as an Investment

Collecting Art To Enrich My Environment
Art created by the artists working locally where I live is my favorite thing to do. Even when if cannot afford their work I love to generate enthusiasim for their work at openings. Getting to the opening and smoozing with the guests is always fun. I love auctions, the best place to buy in my opinion. My area of interest is Asian art particularly Indian. You can get really great stuff at moderate price $2,000-$5,000.

I think alot of art that is appreciated today is art that has a personal aspect to it that the viewer relates to. It's uncanny but nostalgia rules in some cases.

I love this site, Craven, thank you for all your effort.

I agree - this site is a Rolls Royce compared to all the other old, clanky, unkept Chevy's.

Some of my fellow artists up here have gotten into the limited thing. Giclee (sp?) prints are pushed by some of the galleries. You tell me LW. Doesn't a limited edition detract from the original? I don't do prints simply because when someone buys one of my paintings that's it. There aren't anymore. It's not a matter of $ value. I just think that when someone has one of my paintings in their livingroom, there shouldn't be a cheap print of it in someone else's kitchen. The artist doesn't really make that much off of a print anyway. After you pay commission, print cost and framing, there's not much left. Up here some artists are led to believe, by gallery owners, that doing prints is prestigious. I may be really off-base, but I think that is a sad state of affairs for the artist. I co-own an artist studio/gallery and we don't encourage prints. Our motto is paint your passion. If it sells, great. If it doesn't, you have something to be proud of. Lately I've noticed that some of the newer artists are falling into the trap of painting what they think people want. Some of them have only been painting for a few years and think they should be making sales. HA! A couple of months ago, one of these newies asked me," what are people buying up here?" To which I replied," Kinkaid."

The ARK was an investment as well.

The publishers are the only one's who really make any money off producing giclees, serigraphs or whatever. You're right that artists trying to produce their own is almost a fruitless endeavor -- they can't give the printers enough volume to keep the cost of production down. Prints are typically marked up ten time their cost and publishers only pay an artist around $5.00 to $10.00 to sign and number the print. This is all a signature is really worth but if an edition sells out, the artist can reap a fairly good reward. That doesn't happen that often. In addition, no matter what you read about "experts" giving giclees' longevity the green light, they cannot possibly duplicate in a short term what happens to the dyes in these prints, even the fine art sets, over a period of twenty years.

You would have to mention Kinkaid who uses lithography inks on paper, strips off the top layer with chemicals (a la Rauschenberg) and mounts them on canvas, then hires elves to dabble paint on them. Horrible part of that is that the lithograph inks will fade and change color even without UV exposure, leaving only the highlighted paint. It happens so slowly, nobody notices. The salespeople in these galleries manage to foist off multiple sales of one of these "enhanced" prints for investment. This is actually a crime but it's cleverly done by preying on people who don't know any better and they haven't been caught. These salespeople realize that they will be long gone beforf the consumer realizes they've been ripped off. Add to that, Kinkaid is a bad TV instructor artist who either uses the same composition in each image or makes such gross compositional mistakes that even a high school art teacher would give him a Cee or worse.

That last paragraph is all this artist is worth -- he's the pet rock of the art world.

It does effect serious artists who really don't want to prostitute their art and making these reproductions to pass off as "the real thing" is like a hooker trying to pass off an inflatable as the real thing.

We've just bought the third and last lithograph by a friend of ours. He said they are too time consuming to continue and has gone back to strictly oils, though he has been asked to do a few geclees. Each litho was from a limited run of 50. One sold out about a year ago, the second is nearly sold out and there are a few left of this last one. We are very fond of both the artist and his subject matter. It is not a large investment, but it is something we love and will pass on to our children who also love the artist and his work.

I've talked to him about working out a deal for one of his oil paintings. Most of them are so costly that they're out of my league, but he does a few medium-sized canvases. He has known me since we were both very small, so I'm trustworthy and can pay on time! It is the connection I have with the art which makes it a worthy "investment" for me. I cannot imagine ever selling it.

Graphics produced by the artist's hand are absolutely preferable to commercial produced prints. Just hope the artist turns down producing giclees which can only dilute the value of his work. If you love the work and can manage time payments to the artist to purchase a small original, I'd certainly recommend you do so. Of course, nobody should buy an artwork other than the idea that they love and enjoy the piece with no plans to ever sell it. It can take a lifetime to develop a collection whether large or small, whether including works by any major artist or not. It really doesn't matter as your the one who loves to live with the pieces on your wall. Buying for investment is not for the lay person -- it requires a consumate knowledge of art and investing.

Hi, I have some VERY interesting stuff to discuss regarding art scams. I'm completely new to this forum thingy though. Is anyone out there? Sorry...I'm not as stupid as I sound, honest.

Go ahead and write about it. People on this topic receive updates.

Oh, and welcome, Lobsang. Hope you're enjoying yourself!

Please share with us lobsang we all check in regularly and I do not think you sound stupid at all.

I love this discussion. I have 2 questions for those into art law. Is there a time limit, whatever, concerning buying and selling original work? I heard of a buyer who purchased an original from an artist and then turned around and sold it for 4x's the amount of purchase. The artist didn't receive a dime. Is this legal? Also reprint making. Can a buyer make prints of the original work without the consent of the artist?

misspell--should have read re: print making

I've always wanted to know more about the possibly "urban legend" that BIll Gates had his minions go to many museums throughout the world and buy up the "Rights" to digital art. Most people supposedly didn't know what that meant and were happy to take money for it.

Reproducing and making prints of someone else's work without their permission of the artist might be permitted if the work is not copy righted. If it is not copy righted I don't see how the artist could maintain control, but I do not know legal aspects. On the other hand could a reproduction not supervised by the artist be worth anything but next to nothing. Regarding your question about the artist reaping any financial benefit from resale of their art, no once the work is sold by the artist the collector owns it. Any resale profit goes to the owner.

The general rules regarding valuation by IRS are one key to knowing what art is worth. The IRS regulations state that a donated piece must be held for one year or longer, be accessioned by the museum it is donated to. IRS generally does not get involved in cases of less than $20,000. Prior to presenting art for valuation to the Art Panel the IRS has a staff of five art appraiser, all art historians with advanced degrees. These IRS employees view the art, sometimes in person, research auction prices and private sales world wide, and consult with art dealers and museum curators prior to presenting to the panel for further apparisal.


IRS Art Panel

More On The IRS Art Panel

Right, Joanne, the IRS and insurance companies have really cracked down on those claiming an art piece is worth X amount of dollars when it hasn't been verified by an expert. They're wise to the art scams, especially commercially produced prints. I've been working with someone for years on a case of many stolen Aldo Luongo prints and the insurance company is only willing to give him what he paid for them (aha -- he traded them for Italian suits from his store!) He is still waiting as he cannot get an acceptable appraisal -- there are many "appraisors" on a list of giving out bogus appraisals. Commercial gicles, serigraphs, lithographs and the lot depreciate to 20% of their value the minute the buyer leaves the gallery with their purchase (the print only, the framing because it is custom sized to the art is of negligible value unless one could find a buyer for the entire package). Local high end consignment stores are filled consistently calling me to tell them how much they should ask for these works and, in most cases, the consignor walks out without leaving the art and they're not happy. The salespeople in these galleries still will grow a nose that will jut out of the front door of the gallery when they are pushing a commercial framed print.

Thanks for the info. I'm going to contact my attorney son-in-law and have him draft an agreement of sale for me as I do not and never will allow prints of my work. I feel very strongly about this. As for my friend who sold her painting for near to nothing, she now sells prints of the piece for 5x's what the original went for. Go figure. I live in Kinkaid country. It's contageous.

Be very careful of publishers and printers. They can have the work copyrighted (even without your permission) because they have had a hand in generating the prints. You must retain all rights and taking the time to copyright the work yourself is essential and once you have the process in your PC, it's not that difficult. Publishers of giclees and serigraphs so far do not include the copyright symbol in an image as it's being hand signed and numbered by the artist (or estate stamped) and they don't want the print to appear to be commercially manufactured (which is exactly what it is). Typically, original paintings by a new artist are sold for about four times the cost of the print. If the prints are bringing a price of five times what your friend is selling originals for, it's grossly out of line with the industry. The answer is: don't sell originals, sell the reproductions until one has a client base that will bring the price up of the originals.

Also be aware that there are art laws pending and I believe past in some states that a manufactured print cannot be called an "original graphic."