It's her birthday

[pecunium]

and commodorified asked me to give her a post. Since she's wonderful, and I like making her happy, I am doing so.

Because she encouraged me to play with B&W treatments of the jellyfish, and I woke up in the middle of the night to work on some more of them, I'm going to post about them.

This is the first version I did of this shot (I've done four to date).

Lacework


It's a pretty straightforward job. I didn't do anthing but adjust the exposure a bit (it was a little dark, and slightly buddy) and sharpen it.

It was ok, but from looking at the prints I pulled from Three Musketeers and, Trailing Jelly I knew this wasn't going to look as good as it could on paper.

[I took a 10.5 x 16 print of Three Musketeers with me today, matted and in a thin white frame is lookes really good. Since I did about as well as I expected {if not as well as I hoped}, i.e. I came home with everything I brought to the show, I can offer it to anyone who is interested, at a swell price. A one off printing, as I didn't save the file as printed. Trailing Jelly also printed well enough, but it's not got quite the "pop", and is unframed]

So I fiddled with it.

Lacework II


It's a lot better, and will be much better on paper. I upped the saturation, and luminosity on the flesh, and sharpened it a bit more, so the frills are more defined.

But playing with the previous photos, and looking at this:

Three Musketeers B&W GF M


I thought I could get some really nice things out of the details in the body of this one.

Lacework II IR


It's really nice.

As to the arts and crafts fair today, it was interesting, if it had its depressing moments. I had four framed prints, six mounted prints, two calendars, and about fifty unmounted prints. The framed prints were priced fairly (and two of them at the low end). The matted prints were priced low (from 50-95 dollars) and the unmounted prints were forty dollars (8x10) and 75 (11 x 17).

I suspect the folk shopping just weren't planning to spend that. I, mostly, got a quick pass with the eyes, and then they moved on. A few people said they were pretty; a number asked if I'd taken them (the mind boggles. It was an arts and crafts fair. Yes, there were people there who weren't actually selling things they'd made, but photos?).

One woman was desisive of the price, "I take it 75 means 75 dollars (as she was holding a print, about 5x8, of a Lava Gull, taken in Galapagos, double matted (color) and sleeved. Archival, and ready to frame). I said yes, and she sort of twitched her wrist and said, "For this?" before puttig it down and looking at nothing else.

The other artists were nice folks. The lady selling her mother's handbags (handmade, and well constructed; good sizes and interesting fabrics), the potter; who also does a lot of bugs and flowers, the woman with the book she did of all 17 species of penguin. It took her to four continents, and a couple of years, but she got them all; they were great to talk to.

And, as one of the jewelers said, "If nothing sells, the tables were free, and we got lunch."

I've spent worse days, and there were some lessons learned for the next time I do such a thing. It was time well spent, and I didn't leave empty handed.

Comments

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

I'll ponder it, but that increases the sunk costs.

Part of the problem is the don't understand the material costs: The matted print she dismissed was priced at 75. I spent 45 on materials; independent of time and equipment.

Add my time in sales efforts, and I'm not making that much from the sale, when I make it.

[mcduff.livejournal.com]

oh, yeah, i completely understand that your material costs won't be low now. And anyone who knows about photography will understand that too. It was just a marketing idea, based on a what artists i know have experienced. Artifacts are easier to put a price on if the customer can't convince herself she could have done it at home with her Epson.