[Chris Saper]

Forty percent?

"Because that's way we've always done things.." ?

Because a 40 percent number is enough to keep the doors open?

Because artists are so willing to accept it, that owners have never competed with each other on a cost basis, to say "I want your work. My gallery can make it on 30 percent."?

Never having run a gallery, I don't have a clue what the financials look like...for some though, I can bet their overhead is enormous, coupled with the cost of full color print advertising, particuarly in regular national magazines. But while the overhead for a place like Portraits Inc. must be staggering, it in no way compares to a little storefront in Scottsdale, Arizona that wants FIFTY percent.

The idea of across the board percentages, by definition, means that the the $20,000 painter is probably heavily subsidizing the $800 painter.

Still, it all gets back to your own price structure, and whereyouwill find yourself over the longer term. Remember Warren Beatty in "Heaven Can Wait"? He said something to the effect, it doesn't matter what it costs, it matters what we make. If your net take after paying the sales commission keeps you "whole", you'll be OK, so long as your volume doesn't suffer.

So 40 percent? It depends on where you are, and where your price structure is. Being compensated properly is YOUR business. Selling the work is theirs.

Now, of course, other business concerns come into play. Far and away, the biggest chunk of value in painting a portrait is your time. However, there are a lot of other regular expenditures that attend the business, and they are under your control. Buying in quantity, standardizing materials, PLANNING your own budget, saying "No" to marginal opportunities, etc. I have seen so many artists who look at thier sales, subtract their expenses, and then find out what they earn per hour (and it can be an abysmal surprise).

Chris