I'm not very good at talking myself up.  These successful photo artists are great at selling themselves and their photos.  It definitely makes me wonder if I'm in the wrong job when I see this though.  There's really nothing special about most of the photos I have seen selling for small fortunes.  I need to go to BS school  I also think it would be hard for a microstocker to sell photos for huge amounts of money but perhaps that could be used as a rags to riches story?  Some artists sell prints for tiny amounts and they sell their originals for big fees, so perhaps it can be done.

Would be interesting to know what's the most a microsotock contributor has made selling an art photography print.

this is my problem too

Peter Lik sees nature through different eyes�those which haven't been distracted by the modern world.  He is often described as the most important landscape photographer alive�a distinction the artist sidesteps earnestly, detached from such conventions...  

sidesteps but puts it on his website still

another big one in Australia - "Ken Duncan - Australia's Leading Panoramic Photographer" is the title for his website, says it all. I read a while back where he talked of collection limits, that to be serious you have to limit but finding the balance of how many is always difficult.

As Yuri says branding is so important

Can you imagine this sceanario:

One sells a $1million image on IS, then IS takes 80% of it, so one would get $200 000, and IS gets $800 000. Then of course, one have to pay tax, so here in Canada (not 100% sure) I guess you would pay 40-50% tax on that. In the end, you'd get $120 000 max on a $1million sale.

Not worth it at all.

iStock is taking 85%.. (but for Peter they would have open an exception)

after one sale he would be up to 19%

But only for a year?

For me it's nothing about this particular photo itself, or the quality of a specific artist's portfolio, be him a photographer, a painter, a sculpturer, whatever. It's just that it is insane to pay that much money for anything of the kind.  I find it insane enough when I read about a Van Gogh or a Picasso reaching also several million of dollars in an auction.  Maybe if it was the only left work of an artist, or one with a very special history behind it, but not in general.

For me it's nothing about this particular photo itself, or the quality of a specific artist's portfolio, be him a photographer, a painter, a sculpturer, whatever. It's just that it is insane to pay that much money for anything of the kind.  I find it insane enough when I read about a Van Gogh or a Picasso reaching also several million of dollars in an auction.  Maybe if it was the only left work of an artist, or one with a very special history behind it, but not in general.

The classic arts/painters like van Gogh, Piccasso, etc, is a totally differant story, their art is looked upon as an investment, like them or not, its something which never, ever loose in value.
This shot by Lik however, must have been bought rather for its appeal then investment.

For me it's nothing about this particular photo itself, or the quality of a specific artist's portfolio, be him a photographer, a painter, a sculpturer, whatever. It's just that it is insane to pay that much money for anything of the kind.  I find it insane enough when I read about a Van Gogh or a Picasso reaching also several million of dollars in an auction.  Maybe if it was the only left work of an artist, or one with a very special history behind it, but not in general.

Certainly no more insane than paying some dimwit hundreds of thousands of dollars a month because he can throw/hit/dribble a ball.

Certainly no more insane than paying some dimwit hundreds of thousands of dollars a month because he can throw/hit/dribble a ball.

I would agree, but a good sports player (whatever the sport) brings back revenue in merchandise and advertisement. In this case, it is an investment, even if I agree that the money involved is also absurd.

Quote from: Zeus on February 13, 2011, 14:25

Certainly no more insane than paying some dimwit hundreds of thousands of dollars a month because he can throw/hit/dribble a ball.

I would agree, but a good sports player (whatever the sport) brings back revenue in merchandise and advertisement. In this case, it is an investment, even if I agree that the money involved is also absurd.

Art, the kind people deem as must have is by far and away one of the best investments you can make. So this million dollar image may easily become 2, 5 to 10 million while the sports figure heads off to rehab or hires a PR firm to explain his indiscretions. The only reason the sports figure makes that kind of money is because someone fills the stands for, what I believe, is an insane admission fee.

still, no sports figure,artist,photographer or whatever is  worth that kind of money

Quote from: Zeus on February 13, 2011, 14:59

The only reason the sports figure makes that kind of money is because someone fills the stands for, what I believe, is an insane admission fee.

Not really __ by far the most revenue from sports is generated through television. Agree that people are willing to pay absurd amounts to attend though. I found it quite bizarre that lots of people paid $200 just to stand in the carpark outside the Superbowl stadium last weekend. That's just weird.

Seriously, $200 for that? In that case the image is a steal at one million.

One of the first rules in sales is...don't think out of your own pocket think out of the buyers pocket.  That is to say, just because you are a poor starving artist and buy ramen noodles for dinner doesn't mean that you should project your own poverty on the person buying, you must do some acting and pretend what it would be like to have multiple millions,  do you think it is crazy to spend a million on a house....no you don't because it is an investment you say....when art sells in the higher ranges it is usually done knowing full well that in the past 50 years art has been the best investment one can make...there is not another way to invest that returns more money than popular art.  I purchased a photo for $1000 4 years ago form a very popular photographer, the edition of 40 has now sold out it is currently valued at 10,000 I would say earning 1000% on my money is a lot better than any investment I could have made, and I haven't sold it yet.  I will hang on to the photo and enjoy it until I want to sell it and buy a few other lower priced pieces and then sell those when I don't want them any more and so on and so on all the while feeling good about supporting up and coming artist while making a great investment. It is the best place to put your money as it will never go down in value if it is limited edition form a popular photographer.

Quote from: luissantos84 on February 11, 2011, 20:41

Quote from: madelaide on February 11, 2011, 18:53

I never understood what makes an artwork get so much value.

maybe http://www.peterlik.com/awards

Peter Lik Galleries are a work of art, in and of themselves�as you�ll see upon entering. Designed and conceived by the artist, all fourteen galleries�from New York to Australia� exhibit an exquisite attention to detail, and reveal the essence of fine art. Come join us today and experience what makes Peter Lik the most important landscape photographer in the world.

Still, I don't understand why a piece of artwok can be valued so much.

See what Lightscribe wrote it's very well presented. The gallery, the name, the limited edition, there's some status connected with owning a work by this artist (but not you or me?) and the one print, makes it exclusive. It all adds up. There's also the demand. One of us could have a one of a kind, amazing shot, and get $300 for it. Put "famous artists" name on it, which will hang on the wall and impress friends and associates,, the price goes up. It's all fair.

Here's my answer. I'll make one print of this for lets say, 1/10th the price and promise to never take the shot again or print it again. I'm calling it "One River Rock" Only $100,000. Wait this month only for Valentines day a special, only 1/100th of the million, $10,000 for a limited edition one print, printed 26 x 20 full size and custom framed... It's a stitched panorama, note the subtle colors of the Fall afternoon, soft cloud covered lighting. Delivery included in the continental US. Real deal!