I, along with my assistant Susan McNeill, have been busy cataloging my work going back to 1956. We slowly realized that the artist has been freed from “having a gallery” or having rejection from galleries and also free from waiting around for an invitation to show their work to the public. I have spent fifty six years as an artist with over sixty shows. Sounds like a lot of shows, but when you break it down that’s one a year – often with zero sales.
The internet has changed this situation. Through the internet, I am able to reach out to a wider audience. Galleries on average take fifty percent of sales. They work hard and do take chances, they invest heavily in their artists and so I believe they earn that fifty percent. But as I say things have changed. If I take fifty percent off the price of my work, the equation changes. A painting sold in the gallery for $18,000 is now, if sold over the internet, is $9,500, plus shipping. We have had orders from $240 to $7400. Galleries may complain, but unless there is a contract there is nothing to complain about.
We have had much success with this approach and plan to expand our viewership. I would like to see those who love art but cannot afford it to be able to spend as little $150 on a print or drawing and join the ranks of big time collectors like Walter Chrysler, Juiles Fleishman, Hudson Walker, Micheal Zimmer along with museums like PAAM in Ma. , Trenton Museum, Jersey City Museum, Zimmely Museum, Rutgers University and Columbia University, to mention a few places my work resides.
People are beginning more and more to shop online. So why not add art to this? This is far from a new idea but for me it is. Rembrandt realized that people could not afford his paintings so he introduced the 12 shilling print that he could sell to those with less money than the known collectors of the time.It worked , he would have done great with the internet. Unfortunately though, he died in debt.