Sunday, May 4, 2014

a few thoughts on advertising of art

well then - there used to be at one time a specific advertising agency in Manhattan that was dedicated specifically to the advertising art - and whether your work was in a gallery or not you were able to advertise in the Gallery Guide - since I have not ventured into any galleries for quite some time I do not know if such a Gallery Guide publication still exists - but might that still be a viable means of advertising for artists now as it was back in the 1970's?

also - Katherine - there seems to be a very fine line moving south for the distinction between high value art (your term) and cheap reproduction art - not only because of the term reproduction art being applied to actual reproduction but also because the same method of production is utilized for creating original digital art - if my last statement is too much into a cul de sac as you refer to it - fine - but then why not simply head on over to an advertising agency and let them proceed with advertising your work or anyone's work - the real questions that you ask in the beginning of the discussion get lost somewhere in the entire discussion because - unlike the production of normal products by any of the companies producing the products - the artist is an individual producing a products (perhaps sometimes as a collaboration with one or a few other people as well ) unless he or she is Damien Hirst who has set up a team or company to produce his dots and whatever else is produced - (even he admits the name of the one person on the team producing the best dots paintings out of all of his workers) so in a sense he has formed a team of his friends and discovered a was to market THEIR work under his name where everyone benefits as does Coca Cola forms much larger teams to produce the soda syrup and the distributors throughout the world market the finished product and produce it and distribute it in their own designated areas - the parallels between art being marketed and general products become closer and closer as time goes on and social media becomes a way of life and yet they are there - the social media platforms to make money they cost money - but that does not mean that they are as effective as other means of advertising especially if many of the people attempting to utilize them actually ignore much of the knowledge about advertising and creating effective ads. 
this simply means that a great ad is comprised of either a short statement describing and boasting about a product or a long and detailed story about the benefits of a particular product - of course an image depicting someone utilizing the product is important - thus so many paid ads in the fashion magazines of people actually wearing clothing in environments where the type of garment might be worn - but in addition to that - now with the social media - can the environments be closer to the members of the general public wearing the same clothing as say a high net worth lady? 
In other words - create some ads with your art on the walls with people in them - not viewing the art in the museums (for that is where that art will stay) but on the walls of the potential customers in their homes in their own environments - like this: 
or this: so this all becomes very interesting when we look at the reversal of the role of the model in her outfit and the art on the wall - the problem of course that to create and then pay for the advertising through the different print media and now through social media then takes a great deal of money to get the word out - and if instead of thousands of the fashion outfit being sold there is only one piece of art? - well the cost for that piece becomes exorbitant and - who is going to absorb that cost - ---- the artist? no - so the prices of what people call unappealing art becomes exorbitant simply because of the costs to get the word out about this art is-

No comments:

Post a Comment