Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] price of art prints (was re: kyle's fine art)
From: Tina Manley <images@InfoAve.Net>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 21:14:08 -0500
References: <3C8D43C3.3020000@shaw.ca>

At 04:36 PM 3/11/02 -0800, you wrote:

>     I don't know where your head is at, but I was talking
>about artwork, not Toyotas, or BMWs, etc.  Please read the
>whole message again.
>     By your rational, places like art museums would not exist.


Not at all relevant.  You don't own the original art work in 
museums.  Usually it costs and is insured for thousands of dollars by the 
museum or individual collector.  The person who designed the BMW gets 
paid.  Why not the person who paints or photographs the artwork?   Should 
they take a job as mechanic so they can produce art for others to enjoy?

I don't understand the hostility toward the idea that artists should be 
paid for their work.

Tina

Tina Manley, ASMP
http://www.tinamanley.com
images available from http://www.pdiphotos.com


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from "Don Dory" <dorysrus@mindspring.com> (Re: [Leica] price of art prints (was re: kyle's fine art))
Reply from "Matthew Powell" <mlpowell@directvinternet.com> (Re: [Leica] price of art prints (was re: kyle's fine art))
In reply to: Message from "Greg J. Lorenzo" <gregj.lorenzo@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] price of art prints (was re: kyle's fine art))