Better marketing through youtube.com?
I have been thinking about how to do better marketing for artists. We are planning to add a page that allows artists to show their step by step process of creating work. I was wonder if anyone was making a film of the process and posting it on youtube.com or ifilm.com to get more exposure for their work. After a very brief search, this movie is what I came up with as an example. It isn't very good, but it seems to be possible to do something much better without much skill.
Art is such a visual media, maybe a movie would help internet sales? Should we include a feature to allow you to post a film or link to it off BoundlessGallery.com?
5 Comments:
I think the more you direct people "off Boundless.com" the more likely they are to not buy on Boundless.com. If you are in the business to make money, you need to keep the buyers attention focused on the product you are selling. It should be presented in a way that is conducive to making a purchase on the spot. Having them click all over the net will most likely lead them right to purchasing from the artist directly.
I started this company to help artists sell art to buyers who they can't normally reach. My feeling is that only by helping artists can we do well. Does someone think that we aren't serving the artists here at BoundlessGallery.com? Hopefully, by helping we will get a share of the action (but maybe not).
We can add this movie feature easily enough, would anyone use it if we did?
I think this is a great idea. We could also do virtual studio tours, interviews, you name it. BoundlessGallery.com just keeps getting better and is definitely serving its artists. Thank you.
See Peter, I was already thinking about this . I have a You tube page already and was thinking about doing a 2-3 min gallery of my work. I dont know how comfortable I would feel with being infront of the camera but step by step show of progress of the painting, or the gallery are good ideas.
Nearly 30 years ago I made an experiment. I wanted watch the creative process. Once something substantial changed, I took a picture. I did this with about 3 or 5 paintings. It was really a pain, but I didn't find out until a dream told me.
You can't watch the creative process. The old Greeks already knew. Normally, I would finish a medium sized painting in a week, and watching me doing it took me 7 months. They tried it with Picasso, and it was just crap what he produced.
Besides, it is not how you do it but what the end result is what counts. The intermediate stages are usually not interesting at all. All those "how to"-methods just relate to techniques, and technique is not what produces art. Most people working this way produce illustrations, which is fine as such, but not art.
Did you see the Picasso-movie made around 1998? The artist was painting, all the artwork had to be faked because of protests of the heirs, and I remember how intense the colours were. You only saw the brush and some square inches around it, not the picture as such. So it was not about art, it was about the work process. And it was only a few seconds, no more.
How about watching a painting with the camera, faking the exploration of an art lover? Exploring details, getting the whole thing, relating parts, whatever, thus showing the viewer what he might not see himself.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home