Portrait Artist Forum - View Single Post

Richard Monro · 07-18-2005, 09:18 PM

Pricing is probably the most difficult part of marketing art. I put my marketing research hat on last year to make a study of fine art pricing in my area.The results were more than interesting. I surveyed art galleries, art expos and art fairs in my area (Scottsdale, Arizona and environs) and got the price, size and type information for more than 200 different paintings (figurative, landscape, abstract, etc.).

After doing all sorts of data manipulations, a startling conclusion popped out of the data. Almost the sole determinate for pricing was the area of the painting! Gallery paintings sell for $11-$16 per square inch. Art Expo (20 to 30 artists in temporary studios at a common location for 8 to 10 weeks creating, showing and selling) paintings sell at $6-$9 per square inch. Art Fairs (weekend or week long events) tend to sell paintings at $3-$6 per square inch.

The type of art had virtually no bearing on price. Quality of the art, while necessarily subjective to this artist, also had virtually no correlation to price. Typical artists sold in these price ranges. Well know artists sold at much higher price points $20 -$30 per square inch. Some like Howard Terpning sell at prices that are off the charts.

CAUTION! The data set was only 200 and confined to a local market so the conclusions can't be taken as universally applicable. The price points shown are the 80% spread under the bell distribution curve. There were higher and lower prices in each group.

I had suggested to Cynthia a while ago that we ask all the forum artists to blunter to provide their sales and size figures for the last 2 years for me to analyze. If we could get more than 1000 data points on an international basis we might get some really good results to provide guidance to forum members.

I don't recommend starting out selling low and then raising prices. Try to set your prices in the median of the field and spend half your time selling yourself through various marketing channels like direct mail. public relations and such. Get the book "Gorilla Marketing". It has some great ideas. If someone sells too low it gives the impression in the mind of the average buyer that the art is not valuable enough to hang on the wall as fine art. People want to brag about their fine taste. It has to cost to make it worth bragging about.

The ultimate objective is to set a price point that maximizes annual net profit. Sell too low and you will have to create art at a fever pace to make a living. Price too high and you will have a great profit per painting but you may not make enough to live on for the year.

Hope this all helps.

07-18-2005, 09:18 PM	#3
Richard Monro Juried Member Joined: Dec 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ Posts: 388	Pricing is probably the most difficult part of marketing art. I put my marketing research hat on last year to make a study of fine art pricing in my area.The results were more than interesting. I surveyed art galleries, art expos and art fairs in my area (Scottsdale, Arizona and environs) and got the price, size and type information for more than 200 different paintings (figurative, landscape, abstract, etc.). After doing all sorts of data manipulations, a startling conclusion popped out of the data. Almost the sole determinate for pricing was the area of the painting! Gallery paintings sell for $11-$16 per square inch. Art Expo (20 to 30 artists in temporary studios at a common location for 8 to 10 weeks creating, showing and selling) paintings sell at $6-$9 per square inch. Art Fairs (weekend or week long events) tend to sell paintings at $3-$6 per square inch. The type of art had virtually no bearing on price. Quality of the art, while necessarily subjective to this artist, also had virtually no correlation to price. Typical artists sold in these price ranges. Well know artists sold at much higher price points $20 -$30 per square inch. Some like Howard Terpning sell at prices that are off the charts. CAUTION! The data set was only 200 and confined to a local market so the conclusions can't be taken as universally applicable. The price points shown are the 80% spread under the bell distribution curve. There were higher and lower prices in each group. I had suggested to Cynthia a while ago that we ask all the forum artists to blunter to provide their sales and size figures for the last 2 years for me to analyze. If we could get more than 1000 data points on an international basis we might get some really good results to provide guidance to forum members. I don't recommend starting out selling low and then raising prices. Try to set your prices in the median of the field and spend half your time selling yourself through various marketing channels like direct mail. public relations and such. Get the book "Gorilla Marketing". It has some great ideas. If someone sells too low it gives the impression in the mind of the average buyer that the art is not valuable enough to hang on the wall as fine art. People want to brag about their fine taste. It has to cost to make it worth bragging about. The ultimate objective is to set a price point that maximizes annual net profit. Sell too low and you will have to create art at a fever pace to make a living. Price too high and you will have a great profit per painting but you may not make enough to live on for the year. Hope this all helps.