|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
Is 100% Cotton really worth the price? After
all, how much does paper composition, weight, and feel really matter
when our universal objective is selling more art? 200g, 250g, 300g,
350g.We happily pay more to use a heavier weight paper, but does a paper's
weight affect an art buyer's purchase or does it just senselessly raise
our production costs? Would not an art buyer make the same purchase
if a lighter weight paper was used to exhibit the art? In reality, art
buyers are not informed of any of these subjective attributes when purchases
are made in galleries. The sizable majority of fine-art printed on paper,
is typically framed and behind glass, where it may only be seen by the
buyer - not felt. Additionally, art buyers are rarely aware of specific
media attributes, such as weight and composition, as they are not often
featured or displayed along with the art in its description. So, if
end consumers are not influenced by the multitude of paper attributes
so heavily marketed today, then why are we? If not to sell more art,
what exactly are we spending all of this money for? The issue of longevity is also measurable and has been documented by well-known testing facilities namely the Wilhelm Research Institute. (http://www.wilhelm-research.com/pdf/WIR_Ep9600_2003_07_26.pdf) This page on Wilhelm's website suggests that base paper materials alone, are not a clear indicator of a paper's potential lifespan. For example, Epson's alpha cellulose, which is acid free, lignin free, buffered wood-pulp fine art paper called "Epson Watercolor Paper - Radiant White (Non-R)" has permanence results of greater than 98 years under glass, where as "Epson Velvet Fine Art Paper (R)" has permanence results of only 61 years under glass, and "Epson Somerset Velvet Fine Art Paper (R)" has permanence results of 62 years under glass. The only seemingly relevant argument made in support of R, however subjective, is that R simply feels better in your hand. As a business owner you must ask yourself, does "feel" sell more art? It is not common practice for an art buyer to sample the "feel" before making an acquisition of a favored work of art, which is usually framed behind glass and was originally created to be visually stimulating and aesthetically pleasing to the eye, not the hand. Art buyers don't care about feeling art.they care about how it looks. They care about how the art will fit into their home or office. So if the art buyer does not buy based upon "feel", why should we create art based upon this criteria? A self-publishing fine artist/photographer who may spend $20,000/year exclusively using R could cut this in half to $10,000/year using AC. This puts an additional $10,000/year in their pocket without effecting art sales. For this reason alone, printmakers as a whole should always strive to use Non-R unless R is specifically demanded by a customer and knowledge-based persuasion is not feasible. Remember: The artists using AC are getting the same gallery placement and dollar value for their art as the artists using the more costly R. The only difference is that one of them is making a much higher profit margin from each sale. EXAMPLE:
COST COMPARISON Hahnemuhle
Photo Rag 308 (Made from 100% Cotton Rag) About Breathing Color, Inc. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||