I suspect not very much at all. Take the $900 vs $100 hollow form. They are totally different markets. How many $900 items do you see at the average craft fair? How many $100 items at the average juried show or upscale gallery? Folks who sell at prices which do not reflect the time and materials - particularly the time - are not likely to be doing it for a living and probably not selling very much at all.
Notice that I left skill out of the equation.. I think that a skilled and talented turner will know that they are and price accordingly.
Another question that comes to mind is how did Ellsworth price his work when he started? I'd guess that none of the 'names' started selling as full time turners.
I think everyone 'accepts' the premise. I don't think some of us believe that a turner who does not price effectively has much effect on the market. If that turner is full time, they will not last. If they are part time, they will not be making much product.
They might be selling because 'product' is crowding them out of the workshop; all the relatives and friends dread opening the Christmas present; or they want to boost their ego. Folks doing turning for a living will rapidly determine correct pricing of their work or fail.
Snip
Do the 'names' feel an obligation beyond sustaining their own income levels?
You do something else. Or you sell somewhere else.
Has this happened to you?
How much can he turn out that is comparable in design and execution if it is a hobby?
Now for those of us who are retired, it may be a different story. We can turn all day long. But how many of Arch's 'trees' or my 'bowl with hole in bottom' do you think it would take to destroy the market as we know it?
I suspect that people sell more or less at exactly the appropriate price for their time, materials, and skill. Beginning or casual turners are likely turning found wood or firewood, probably have a lot of time on their hands (or are hiding from a wife w/a honeydo list!) and have average skill at best.
Prices for their pieces probably should be fairly low, given that their materials are often close to free, they have plenty of time which is thus, by definition, less valuable than that of a full time professional turner, and their skill level precludes them from making something that will really compete in the same arena as a more skilled turner.
I've always felt that woodturners are a bit of an anachronism to some extent. We want to earn our living doing something that is more at home in the 18th or 19th century. Mass production has effectively stripped away the ability of the common woodturner to realistically make a living at turning. Some will manage to, but they won't ever be rich. Even the 'names' do things on the side like teach, make books/videos, sell lathes or signature tools, etc. The average household just isn't going to pay us what we need to charge to make a living.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that we all have competition of some sort so the task ahead of us is to define our market and sell to it. One can go down to Walmart or similar and buy wood salad bowls from Asia for $10 - $20 or so. They're all quite uniform in size, nicely finished, although usually bland wood. I can't compete w/that. One of my salad bowls will retail for maybe $75 to $150 bucks but I sell at a gift shop, not a Walmart.
Are they worth that? I dunno. I sure wouldn't pay that much for a darn bowl. But folks do so I guess they are worth that. Worth is really just what you can get for something after all. Thing is, they're not buying a bowl from me. They're buying a unique hand crafted memory of their cruise to Alaska.
To some extent thinking that lowball woodturners should raise their prices is like asking if the makers of a Chevy shouldn't double their prices to keep the makers of a Lexus going. Bit of an exaggeration perhaps, but it draws the point. If I'm selling at a flea market, I expect to sell at flea market prices, competing against other flea market turners. If I'm selling at a gift shop, or moving up a notch at an art gallery, I expect to compete at gift shop/art gallery prices. It doesn't matter what the flea market guy is doing - my customers aren't looking at his pieces.
By the time someone has the skill to compete w/me, he's going to have an idea of his skill level and what his work is worth. Until then, he really isn't competition. Just like I'm not any competition to John Jordan or David Ellsworth. I'm just not that good.
I say let the market decide. If someone is undercutting another to the point that the latter can't earn what they think they need to, then they need to redirect their marketing efforts in a new direction. If there is no market for their turnings, then the market has decided. It's a strange mindset that seems to permeate our culture that markets should be 'protected'. Maybe Congress outta pass a law that nobody can sell a salad bowl for less than $X.oo. Wohoo - we're in the big leagues now!
First thing they taught us in Economics 101 was that in the early part of the last century the railroads thought they were in the railroad business. They weren't. They were (are) in the transportation business. As a result, they've seen a smaller and smaller slice of the pie.
I'm not in the woodturning business. I'm in the tourist business (primarily). I have about 4 to 5 months in which to sell the bulk of my work, and virtually no chance of repeat customers. But that's OK, because that's the market I *chose* to pursue. (Of course, by day I'm a computer doinker, so if I choose to go fishing instead of turning my family doesn't starve.)
What market have you chosen to pursue?*
Just my .02...
...Kevin
*Rhetorical question, not directed at Owen in particular.
Consider the chair bodgers working in the woods for what, even in their day, was a meager wage. Yet their work was the only kind which could pay the bills - production, not creation. The turning as "art," where what's sold is sizzle, not steak, is a relatively new phenomenon, and its success, like all other non-necessities, is due more to the pocketbook of the purchaser than the ability of the artist. Wood pleases the eye, but must also remain in competition for that eye and dollar with a long-established art - pottery, and another which fascinates me personally - glass.
Doesn't socialism also support subsidies. That is what I see Owen arguing against. Many turners subsidize their turning sales with their day job income. Martin
Seems as if this thread has veered from legal and moral problems of plagiarism to questions of unfair business practices, unless of course, it's not considered plagiary or unfair if the copy is priced high enough.
Is it wrong for a turner to work a day job in order to keep the prices of his/her turnings affordable?
To the best of my knowlege, all of the 'name' turners write books, give paid demos, teach classes,, make videos, sell tools, or all of those. So, I guess the answer is yes.
Fixed prices are not "subsidies?" Of course we will all assume, with Owen's optimism, that they will be fixed higher, not lower.
In the evil empire days, all Soviet products including those produced by "craft cooperatives" were priced at the factory. Membership in such co-ops was, of course, often determined by politics, rather than proficiency.
In most cases it's _necessary_ for a turner to eat. The guys that are doing the "undercutting" aren't accomplished artists for the most part, and are selling more treen that museum pieces...
I have no idea since none have participated in this thread. But, I would say that they have drawn attention to turning as art'n'craft which can't hurt any turner. They also appear to be selling work at prices which support each other, and, encourage others new-to-selling to price their work to reflect the time and skills the person has developed. snip
Does it matter? It certainly appears to have happened with the $900 Ellsworth vs. $100 no-name hollow turning.
Well, he inherited a fortune as well as retired from a CEO position with a Platinum retirement package - he really doesn't care if he ever earns another dime but he has to find something to do with his time since his wife prefers the company of the pool boy.
But Chevy isn't making and selling a clone of a Lexus. That's the whole starting point for this discussion. Copying someone else's work. Ellsworth drew a distinction when the copies are put up for sale. In effect, copying is OK for skill-building and personal enjoyment. Copying to make sales is unethical. Many of these imitators don't charge prices comparable to the creator's prices and are not only using someone else's design and ideas but may be pulling sales from them as well.
I think the effect will be that turners with unique designs and techniques will no longer feel they want to share with others. The market for turning seems fairly small - why show others how to make what you make so they can copy you and potentially take away sales? Consider that this phenomenon of wide-spread sharing only goes back 25 years or so. I have heard and read many times that the turning community appears to be unique in that successful turners are so willing to give of themselves so that others may learn. Will imitation to make sales bring about the demise of the open community?
According to Darrell's account, the $100 hollow form imitation *was* presented in the same market as the $900 original. And other than a signature on the bottom it was indistinguishable from the work of the known turner. Why should we excuse the non-pro turner who may not rely on sales for a living and may not price his product in such a way as to reflect his time, skills and direct expenses? Might the juxtaposition of these two indistinguishable, as to maker, objects cause the higher priced one to be passed over in favor of the inexpensive one? (I argued in past posts that the $100 price was certainly, in my opinion, unrealistically priced too low - while I suspect the $900 is high though much closer to an accurate return for the turner's input.)
Actually your comments bring us right back to the original posting about plagiarism. Ellsworth's article says (paraphrasing) that copying someone else's design is a natural desire and should be encouraged as a learning process. Displaying these things in your personal surroundings is to be expected. However he draws the line when price tags are put on the imitations. He says, "... copying for the purpose of learning can become a tool for self-discovery. Copying for profit is simply a way of stealing another person's voice and using it as if it were our own."
The pieces I'm excited about making for the future take me a lot of time. Upwards of 18-20 hours - i.e. half a week. I don't see the time coming down a whole lot as experience with the process grows. I plan on being paid fairly for my design, turning and finishing skills - as well as being able to purchase new tools, supplies, covering sales costs, etc. I'm going to be pissed off when someone who works outside turning makes his imitations in the evenings over several weeks and sells them for 20% of what I know is a reasonable price. Almost makes me want to hoard the design and protect what I've created from imitators who could care less that they are taking from me.
InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.