Relationship and mutual obligations between the artist and gallery owners

[Pavel]

Сообщение от Konstantin

This same treaty process, but not violent.
If the artist already venerable and called-(as our Paul for example) and it is all, then yes lock on to any gallery not needed.
And if he can not sell, then come to an agreement with a gallery of some conditions. But conditions may be different, and more importantly are not conditions, but that the result was - the sale.

The agreement defines the relationship of the artist with the dealer. This does not mean that the artist must become a trader for conclusion. I had already spoken about that artist signing an agreement in America puts the work in Moscow, at the same time I knew that the contract specifies a monopoly on the work of this artist, or with Steinberg, I was not sure. It is always a question of decency.
But the artist's many ways to circumvent the treaty especially when he is not satisfied by the merchant. Especially we have no where to put trade and decency trader determined gentleman he or someone why not Pharaoh or not a member of the royal family?
Usually dishonest traders and behave rude act like these gentlemen, in fact, trying every possible way to cheat the artist. For example using the fact that it is difficult to control the sale, conceal about the artist and pay a price much lower than the agreement.
  Rusanov vainly puffed up-sell if sold, but the work is not original, obviously commercial work. Ability to have little creativity.