On 01/11/15 03:23 PM, Antonio Roberts wrote: > > My motivation behind this decision was my belief that the value of an > artwork should not be based on scarcity.
+1 > If I had used expensive > materials or if making multiples was labour intensive then I could see > more justification in raising the price and producing less. However, > in my case they were relatively inexpensive digital prints and so > making multiples was less of a problem. Treat it as tipping or patronage in return for a touch of the artist's aura? > This presents a problem if I want to make more money from things like prints. You can always do prints with those nicer materials (archival paper/inks etc.) and charge more for those. Or you can sign prints or provide certificates of authenticity - https://www.flickr.com/photos/http_gallery/22348355411/ There are several startups that do blockchain-based editions of digital works. ascribe for example: https://www.ascribe.io/ (I've met some of the people from ascribe but don't have any involvement with the project. Other services are available etc.) that takes the prints out of the equation altogether. :-) > Crowdfunding (patreon, kickstarter etc) has been suggested in the past > but that is more about supporting the artist, not about making money > directly from the artwork itself. You could crowdfund the edition and have the prints as backer rewards at various levels. Crowdfunding works best with things that are events with a narrative people can get involved with, so you'd probably need to do annual or biannual crowdfunding events for projects or (groups of) editions. You could also sell shares in a work/project/edition in return for e.g. sponsorship mentions at shows (like at the end of a crowdfunded movie or book). - Rob. _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
