I used to sell repros alongside my originals in my retail studio/gallery. What I found is that sales of my originals just about doubled after I removed them. I reintroduced them during a slow time for a while last year and while I sold some alongside my originals, in the scheme of things it wasn’t worth it. Keep in mind, a lot of people who want to buy will settle on the least expensive thing. I know a lot of art festival people who stopped selling cards, and found that just as many people bought the next biggest thing up…thus spiking their overall profits.

I am prolific, and I do have smaller originals for those really on a budget, but my feeling is that the general population does not want reproductions, and enough of them actually seemed turned off when they’re offered. I’ve had people ask if I have prints for sale, and when I say “no”, they say “good”.

Now, I do think I would offer them again if I started doing really time intensive paintings which were priced above most people’s budgets. Most of my bigger work, in my impressionistic style, sells in the $1600 to $2400 range which fits into people’s comfort zones. However, if I doubled or tripled the prices, (which I would do if I tripled the time it takes to paint one) I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t sell nearly as many originals. But I might sell enough reproductions to make it worth it.

So those are my thoughts….it depends on how you handle originals.

Yeah, I’m not sure you can separate the last two options.

Funny, I just had someone email me the other day to let me know he found my website by using Google Goggles on a print hanging in a hotel where they were staying. That’s probably the most unusual way I’ve heard of someone finding my website. Considering the hotel didn’t have a plaque next to the picture telling everyone who the artist was, I thought that was pretty cool that he could find out all about it with the click of his iPhone.

But, back to the point of the thread here, it’s nice to know there are prints of my art in hotels across the country. It’s free promotion for me and that is value. But, that’s value to me. I suspect the “value” you are talking about here is whether prints increase the price-value of originals. I’d say not directly. But if prints help an artist become well-known, and being well-known increases the demand for the originals and that in turn increases the value of the artist’s originals then, yes, it does increase the value.

There needs to be an option that says “It depends!” I would imagine some artists do find making reprints, depending on what kind of reprints, could harm them. But for the most part I don’t believe it does. Perhaps the theory that it harms you is outdated, or was self serving in a time when artists usually didn’t sell privately or there was no internet or we didn’t have the reprint options we do now. I have never had a buyer express concern over it one way or another, and many buyers can’t afford original art, and will buy inexpensive reprints, usually of a small size. Some art lends itself well to products like shirts and cups, too. Many artists make more off the reprints and also licensing deals, than they do off the original. Their work is suited to it. If one’s work isn’t, then they should probably not do it.

I asked about originals and she said her prints were so good her customers didn’t want originals.

That doesn’t make sense to me. Unless she digitally alters her prints to enhance them from what the original looks like. I would understand if she said prints are within the budget of her primary clientele. Price aside, I just can’t fathom someone saying a print is better than having an original.

If I sell my paintings for xxxx dollars, and I have full scale copies available for x…

Although the copy has not devalued the price of the original (it is still worth xxxx) it has made it more difficult to sell.

I would think that copies smaller than the original would not have as great an effect on the sales of the original. However, some work really needs the scale to work (mine are a good example of this)

But, some buyers really do have space limitations, and the smaller copy may fit their needs when the original is too large.

In that case, a sale is better than a walk-away I would think.

What do you think of selling prints after the original has been sold? Does the image copyright belong to the owner of the painting or does it still belong to me? I would appreciate your thoughts since I have never sold prints before. Thanks.