Buying Prints, Questions

[raytoei@gmail.com]

Hi,

I would like to know, from the perspective of a buyer, how to

think about valuation of a signed photo from a famous

photographer. For example, would a signed Photobook from

the photog be more valuable than an Autographed Photobook.

And would a Photobook be less valuable than a signed Silver

Gelatin Photo ?

Any differences from buying from a private seller than say from a

auction or art house ?

I am starting to think about investing in some prints, and would

appreciate any help in the right direction.

raytoei

 

[noisycheese]

I have no real expertise in this, but IMHO a signed print or book would probably be more valuable than a non signed print or book.

I would also think that a signed fine print would sell for more than a signed book.

Just my thoughts on the question at hand...

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Prints are generally worth more than books. There are a lot of factors in print valuation though. "Vintage" prints are worth more than later prints.

A "Vintage" print is one made by the photographer, or under his supervision, close to the time the photograph was made. Photographers with really long careers, like Ansel Adams, often had early photos that they kept printing and selling over a period of decades. Later prints are usually worth less than early ones. Prints made from the negatives after the photographer died are worth far less. Edward Weston's sons made prints of their father's negs after he died; they're worth a lot less than the ones that Edward and his sons made during his lifetime.

Authenticity is another issue. There are fakes of some famous images out there. Also, there are later prints being sold erroneously or fraudulently as Vintage prints. Buying from a respected dealer or an auction house that specializes in selling art gives you some protection, since they have experts on staff and will usually offer a guarantee to refund your money if the print is later proven to be newer than promised or fake.

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

Thanks for the advice, chris and noisycheese,
Will try looking for some of the art houses
to start. If u have any further recommendations,
pls share.
Thanks again.
Raytoei

 

[gns]

This site compiles a lot of information from auctions and gallery shows...
http://collectordaily.com/

Out of curiosity, what are you looking to buy?

Gary

 

[ivanuskokovic]

Satoshi Kino****a

Satoshi Kino****a

Anybody collecting vintage (1986-1991) Satoshi Kino****a prints?

 

[mfogiel]

If you have some space in your house, consider buying this:http://www.luxury4men.com/2013/04/sebastiao-salgado-genesis.html
It comes in 2 volumes and a pretty wooden support for exposing, I think this will be a nice photo investment for a collector.

 

[jsrockit]

Prints can be worth millions, photobooks can be worth hundreds of thousands ... generally speaking. Maybe someday the right book will come along and get into the 1M area. Books with text have sold for a lot more than the most expensive photo prints. The photo book hasn't been around a long time vs. other types of books.

Signed only matters if it is someone who people care about. Many photo book stores have signed editions of most of their books and many are priced the same as the non-signed versions.

 

[gns]

If you have some space in your house, consider buying this:http://www.luxury4men.com/2013/04/sebastiao-salgado-genesis.html
It comes in 2 volumes and a pretty wooden support for exposing, I think this will be a nice photo investment for a collector.

To me that seems ridiculous...So over the top and incongruous with its theme.
Not to say it couldn't turn out to be a good investment.

Gary

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

Guys,

thanks for the advice. This is what I have gathered, mainly through
incomplete trawling the net:
In terms of medium,

Lithograph Prints are cheapest to own.
Lithograph Prints with limited run xxxx/yyyy are next
Lithograph Prints with signature and limited are most desirable.
Next are actual photos,
Photos with signature and limited runs are more valuable

* Everything being equal, older prints/photos are more valuable.
* Larger prints/photos are more valuable

A couple of things which I am still figuring out:
* CMOA (carnegie museum of art) or other stamp, does it matter ?
* Are photobooks books or prints ? I am inclined to think there are books,
so perhaps a First Edition, Signed book is more valuable?

Still searching and learning.

thanks

raytoei

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

The photo fine art market is quite unregulated,
what i have read and learnt so far is that a
good piece of art should have Provence,
Authenticity, Quality, Condition, Exposure.

Provence, aka who-has-owned-this-previously
applies more to original paintings, however
for fine art photography, this is a bit difficult
as negatives can be made into multiple prints,
also known as editions.

Originally, silver gelatin print (also known as wet print)
is the way to go, however, I find that Lithographic
prints or the older Gravure printing are also popular and
cheaper alternative. With digital media, I expect
the next wave to include non-silver print as well.

Prints comes in editions, for example, for certain size
and medium, a print can be limited to say 100 or 1000 prints.
Usually these prints are signed by the author either
on the photo or on the flip side ("verso").

Everything being equal, older limited prints/photos with
signature are worth more. Photos or prints with signature
printed (rather than hand-signed), especially when the
author has passed on, is worth less.

However, the question is, how does one value the price of
(a) an original silver print with signature (b) a hand signed picture
of a lithograph carefully removed from a first book (c) an
autographed Photo book.


Here are two similar prints of HCB's lunch by the river:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/HENRI-CARTI...84702?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item417346a85e

http://www.ebay.com/itm/HENRI-CARTI...?pt=UK_Art_Photographs_RL&hash=item1e80f9edfd

both are signed, the top link is 12,500 while the bottom one is only 550 usd.
the main difference is that the top item is an official print by HCB, it is
silver print, signed and stamped. While the second is a lithographic print, in
poorer condition, and HCB's signature appear more as an autograph than a
signature.

Valuating photo print is quite tricky, there are few books on collecting and
valuing photos, i am still reading up and trying to figure out about this
market. From my observation, the prices come about from three sources:
a. Previously sold similar pieces b. prices that buyers are willing to pay (eg.
Ebay, Artnet) c. Market makers like Christies or Sotheby's who put up price
ranges in catalogs as an indicator of how much the item could fetch in an
auction.

(still learning and reading)

raytoei

 

[Landshark]

I don't believe that HCB made his own prints but used the same printer for years.