The artists that use photography as their privileged mean (here we are talking about artists only, not about other professionals that use photography like reporters, fashion photographers, designer etc.) have fall insituation: to conciliate communicate with selling in a commercial circuit that is managed primarily by art galleries.They prefer to sell unique works of art (or what is the same only a few copies). It is easier and more profitable to sell one piece at one thousand euros than one thousand at one euro. They know their business and mange it in the best possible way, but it is a limitation for artists that want to impact the biggest amount of people. Many, almost all the artists try to solve this paradox by a tortuous way, which is to cause a “rebound communication”, meaning to go after fame, selling unique (or pseudo unique) works of art and from there provoke a more massive impact. At the entry of the road to fame are the galleries, some galleries, a couple of agencies and a few art managers. The majority of the artists that follow this strategy don’t go very far.
Is there anything better? Yes, undoubtedly, not only because always there is something better, but because it is not an essential condition of the art photography or of any art to depend on the market. It is not true that art can be defined as “what is sold as art”.
We are convinced that art, an photography in particular, can recuperate their rationale, their meaning in society if artists protect stubbornly their autonomy making that the pieces they produce become an incitement to discussion, making that photography is not spoken in terms of prices but in terms of value. Prices are only an accessory, useful but not indispensable and not an obstacle to communication.
