Photography as an object of investment
 

Dear visitors of the forum, very interesting to "hear" your answers a few questions :)

1. Can a photograph be compared with artists - namely, to create images and pictures of them, because it makes the artist, painting on canvas scenes (images) out of his imagination?

2. How do you feel about the fact that the picture can be sold 100 times, namely, the circulation of 100/100 ie owner of one and the same photos can be 100 people :) and each of them pay for their mark, let's say $ 1000?

3. You buy a photo? If yes, why? If No, again, why?

I would be very glad to see your answers.

Theoretically, the photographer can compare with the artist-painter, but he has other means of representation.
However, generally accepted that the artist is one who knows how to draw. Could be an artist not a man who knew how to draw? :):( Usually this will happen. Those who can not draw, and the slope is - becomes a photographer.
   If you sell an image and not the negatives /digital object and guarantees that the photographer is not zanachil stack of copies, then buy as a collector's rarity makes no sense (to me). Exceptions are retro photo negatives are likely lost. But if the photo will be autographed by the photographer, it will be more expensive. For example, the artist Fairy during the advertising companies Obama sold through online store posters drawn from photographs, like 30 dollarikov, but with his autograph and a very well earned.

Do you think photos of people who dorisovyvayut, finalizing in graphic editors their photos, thus significantly altering the originally received image?

There reportage photography in which the revision is not desirable. A photographer and artist is simply obliged to work with the image .:)
If dorisovyvaetsya graphics editor, it is no longer picture obtained. Fairy traced Obama is like a vector editor and turned poster. They are simpler, one can say that you do not painter, a artist. But Associated Press filed a lawsuit with a claim on the use of their photos, but if the artist brings to the original fairly new, it is no longer a violation. Although like in this story was shown another picture, remarkably similar to a photograph of the Associated press.

1. I think the photographer does not need to be compared with the artist. Photographer, for me, completely self-contained concept.

2. More widespread circulation of 10 pcs. In our growing market think to start with "full exclusives", ie 1 pc. without repetition, then more likely to buy.

3. I buy old photos, because I like them. New not yet buy.

I totally agree with you, studying the results of auctions to sell pictures, I noticed that most of the photos are not "exclusive" and in fact because of this lose their "value" for the collector. I think that 1 copy - this is exactly what will be interesting to many.

Added after 11 minutes
Once I visited the occupation of Kiev Photoschool ... there sounded an example of a photographer working for an agency known ... as we were told in the process turned out that its finished the photographer takes pictures in the graphical editor. As a result of his photos over the years were removed, and he was fired ...

You just noticed that overseas call artist. I think that Fairy exactly actor, but not an artist and photographer :)

I personally do not buy and that surprises me those who buy the picture, but being somehow Gallery Lumiere, watched a lively trade photographs at prices an average of about 10 000 rubles. (approximately $ 300). Circulation designated 10-15 pcs. and with the mandatory signature of the author. However, I do not understand how to make sure that the circulation of 10 pcs.

This question I zadoval them the same answer. decency galleries and the author himself, the negatives remain with the author ...

Consequently, buying a photograph, a circulation of more than 1 copies. collector is exempt from the photo multiplier, which means that his investment will fall short of his hopes ...
But because they are buying!
For example: http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/s...010601n#action = refine & selectedids = 18 & CID = 5447010010601n & sid = 9280fe25-31fa-4e51-bb41-c7764da521a1

Not yet bought, but there is a desire and this need. I think that is very promising field and in the next few years the pace. Fears exactly the same as with any lottery drawing - a lot rests on the reputation of the author and his dealer. Nonetheless, it is a genre - someone who has to start to trust.

All of these runs and Photoshop - things technical. If something knocks that you'll think about the nuances in the last turn.

Sure you can - in the genre of staged photography. Many kontemporari artists and works.

:confused:
Among my friends a few people are buying old (vintage) photos. For me the important information in the pictures, not aesthetics, so I, for example, buy the album Dmitieva, not the photo - (in the album count last longer -> more and Information). But you probably ask for another picture :shy:

Practice shows that investment objects may be qualitative IN GOOD CONDITION PICTURES Celebrations and Life RUSSIA EMPEROR

1. Photographer - this is certainly an artist. It totally does not matter whether he creates the image of himself or photographs, for example, natural species or building.

2. My attitude is as to the author's photographs. Two identical prints can not be. That is the creative work of the author does not end after the "fly the bird."

Search the web, including here at the forum, photos Ancell (Anzel) Adams, Vladimir Samoilov, Vladimir Clavijo-Telepneva, Franz Lanting, Alexander Viktorov. Highly recommend :)

So something like that. A kind and not so. Draw a picture can not each much. A photograph the landscape - each, and if still camera - a good SLR, so much more. Yes you can talk about talent, but on average the same thing. I am sure everyone at home is full of macro flowers, butterflies and so on. Recently, my friend, knowing that I've photographed and asked for her photo on the wall. I outlined that some would like. The upshot was that on my advice she photographed and happy ...

Aga !:) "But if you ask the two photographers - amateur and the Masters - with the same terms and other conditions being equal to photograph, for example, landscape, and then print the author's photographs, then we obtain" photo of schoolroom! " and work of art.
A choice of shooting and lighting, and composition (including nepostanovochnyh frame composition should be in every frame, even in the picture of a flower or an ant), and all copyrights secrets film development and printing? This is a great art! And nothing about the staging shooting, I say nothing at all - there is so much to know and be able, in such a subtle taste to have to really create a work of art!
By the way, how can I forget about Rodchenko? That's the genius of photography! And, incidentally, Leni Riefenstahl - not to mention what (unfortunately great!) Advocacy of force had her things, they are as works of art are great, but if you look at her photos the past few decades of life, it's amazing what a talent !
So, in my opinion, the picture - a complicated form of fine art, but the market still clearly undervalued. And this is largely due to the fact that there are (especially us) laws that would allow fully protect the interests of both the author and the seller.
As regards the author's photographs Circulation. If each imprint is made by the author, only the author knows what solutions he uses and in what proportion. These masters of all do (and did) hands, so two identical - no.