As to the 48k person, clearly they need a money management class. I know several artists though who have a very similar story, that is making a fair sum but winding up breaking even. Maybe it’s because we actually have to pay for food and electricity and health insurance that I don’t put every penny I earn back into the business. My net to gross ratio is around 30-45%. I think an artist has to make wise choices on what really works.

Maggie S. had several things going for her. She was naturally talented and driven. She had one post that showed how she spent every minute of the day. I think Hitler would have envied her dedication to time management. Here’s the biggie though. She is a talented writer (For those who don’t know, so talented that she quit art and is now a published and successful writer) and she marketed her art by using this, her strongest talent. Also she didn’t need the money she earned right away. Meaning she had the financial support of her husband (as did I when I started) to get her art business off the ground. This is hugely helpful though not necessary to success. It does take alot of the pressure off though.

I am proud of how I took a $500 start up to a business that supports us in less than 10 years. But it also saddens me to see so many with the talent not make it when it is so doable.

I was intrigued about a statement where the artist sold 48K worth of work last year, but was in the hole $300 after expenses.

I do think that universities have historically not taught about marketing much and also tend to critisize “commercialism” in the fine arts side of things, so this effects it all too from my point of view.

In general, I love reading these debates about money/making a living and art.

All I really know is that Maggie S. made me believe that any artist who applies proper markenting techniques can make some decent money from art. I had hoped to supplement my retirement income with money from art. I retired early, partly out f family demands, but also I had always dreamed of retiring early to have more time (and as years mounted on, energy) for doing art. In light of all this, I found it an identifiable comment in response to the post, that those most concerned with making money from art are those without enough retirement or alternative income. I do think that if I felt “secure” enough in my income, I may be less concerned with marketing, at least in the short run. I am concerned with how much money to spend on marketing, since having money is a concern. But then again, it may have more to do with making a connection with my art and not just making money. I do know that I need to work harder on both the art and marketing fronts and that it will cost money.

My hat always been off to you in your ability to make a living from your art, as you know. Doesn’t reading this post and the comments make you feel more proud of your accomplishments? I think it should.

This I absolutely agree with this, i think if you have experienced poverty, and / or lack of work in your trained field you are more determined to make a living from you art.

On the business side of the discussion, when we went to college it was very practical however absolutely no selling or business skills were even mentioned. Looking back on this i am appalled at whoever created the course we did as i would say 90% of my daily chores are more about selling and dealing with clients than painting! Ok so maybe that’s a little over the top, but it often feels like it! Nick and i didn’t even really know how to answer the phone to a client let alone work out how to get a client!

Making a living from any kind of art is hard and i admire anyone who can create and sustain a full time wage from it, especially in these hard economic times.

There are a host of skills involved in self employment no matter what that’s in — but I think schools that don’t add any small business courses to the curriculum are doing a disservice to the students who want to be full time artists. I’ve found no guidance in how to price art other than from the street painters I knew in New Orleans — they were more than willing to talk nuts and bolts about how they set their prices and how to tell what the market will bear.

A few basic bits of information are priceless. The more solvent artists with higher incomes do invest in prints and market their prints. It’s a way to get paid decently for the amount of time and work that goes into the original, especially if they’re using techniques that are lengthy and difficult. Print sales were the majority of income for a great many of the wealthier artists I knew.

Yet they didn’t say anything about that in the college art classes and so people who are trying to live on just what the originals bring in are going to be running a Red Queen’s Race, they won’t sell it much more than what the market will bear but they’re not getting the full harvest either. A lot of people who love their art can’t afford the originals but enjoy good archival prints. Heck, I collect originals but will also sometimes buy a good archival print too.

While the artist who discovers that doing good landscapes works for the clientele doesn’t always realize that another aspect of prints is that you can market the image to greeting card companies to be reduced and sold in the millions. When it’s that good and it happens to be a traditional subject, yes, it’ll also appear in that ephemera.

And then lose snob appeal even though those same card companes are carelessly and blithely lumping their work in with Van Gogh and sundry other famous painters whose reputation is undimmed by being subjected to annual calendar reproduction.

I’d be interesting to run a survey on the same painters to find out how many are doing active prints sales and active merchandising sales. I suspect more prosperous artists are the ones not embarrassed to see one of their paintings on a greeting card or a poster.

I think a lot of people want to be artists because they think it’s easy money, when in reality those who do earn a living through art have to work hard. As you say, you need a business head and not just a flare for art.

Maybe these ones who are highly educated think their qualification is enough? That people should want to buy their art because they can prove their worth with lots of letters after their name? Some would say it’s because they have spent too long in a classroom and have not experienced life - so their art is shallow.

I don’t know. Money and art is such a complicated subject, and the art world is so fickle.