Notes from the President: The Secondary Market Then and Now

Dr. Elin Lake-Ewald

Ph.D., ASA, FRICS

Each of us finds a way to relax during fall’s frantic art weeks; some eat, some drink, some watch Netflix, some go to the movies, some do what some like to do. I retreat into the past.

Just now I reached blindly into the cabinet in my office with annual auction catalogs. Sotheby’s "Review of 1961-62" and Christie’s “Review of the Year 1962-63” came into my hands. What was happening well over 50 years ago in the art world? These would be all non-American sales.

Sotheby’s London sold Honore Daumier’s "Third Class Carriage," an iconic image, for just a trifle over $100,000. The approximately 10 x 13-inch painting on panel was from the Collection of Mr. & Mrs. Anson Beard of New York. In the upcoming sale at Sotheby’s New York this week there is an approximately 8 x 8-inch ink, ink wash and conte crayon drawing, "Avant l'audience," from the Collection of Samuel & Ethel Lefrak that is estimated at $100-150,000.

Years ago it was sometimes estimated that the ratio of the value of painting to drawing by the same artist was 4 to 1. Anyway, that’s no longer relevant since it has been 55 years hence and the drawing of two kneeling figures that might have been valued between $2,000 -3,000 in 1961.

A figure on square steps by Henry, 7 ¼ x 9 ¼, bronze, was auctioned off at Christie’s in 62-63 for $7,000 back then, while in the upcoming sale a smaller seated mother and child, 5 1/4 in height, is estimated (again) for $100-150,000.  Both are editioned pieces.

And look what one could get at Christie’s in those years for well under $3,000; a giltwood & inlaid tortoiseshell center table, 57 inches wide x 34 ½ deep, purchased by the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam for $2,793.

At first glance, I thought the André Derain “Pool of  London” Fauvist watercolor and bodycolor had sold for $12 million, but of course, that couldn’t have been true, not then. The about 20 x 20 signed work actually received $12,632 – that’s thousands – at Christie's.

"The Pool of London," André Derain

"The Pool of London," André Derain

During 1962-63 Christie’s total sales were $10,500,000, a relatively dramatic increase of $700,000 over the previous year. It was noted in the catalog that there had been a noted shortage of Old Master paintings indicating that the collectors’ funds had increased for what was available.In that year’s drawing sale a caricature of an old man by Leonardo da Vinci, 4 ¼ x 4 ¼, brought $42,630, while Tintoretto’s “Christ at the Pool of Bethesda" sold for $122,735. That was really big money in that era.

Sotheby’s catalog spent many paragraphs discussing the stability of the art market at this time, citing the fact that the art market used to react immediately to stock market, movements, either up or down, but this year it appeared not to have happened. Consignments from the U.S. seemed to help. One, Amedeo Modigliani’s “L’Homme Au Verre De Vin,” painted circa 1918 and about 36 x 21 realized $103,000. I could not help but note that not all work did as well as the auctioneer insisted. Henri Matisse’s "Femme a l’Ombrelle Verte," a beautiful work from 1920, Nice, and from the Collection of W. Somerset Maugham, Esq., 27 x 22, brought only $89,600.

It is a little disconcerting to rifle through these old catalogs and see the magnificent works available in those days, knowing the current prices for works half as fine. I don’t know why I wrote that it was relaxing. It isn’t at all.

 

What to Look for When Collecting Photographs (part I)

"A True Photograph need not be explained, nor can it be contained in words" - Ansel Adams

While this holds true in the visual appreciation of a photo, when purchasing at auction you may want to be a little more loquacious. At a lecture in conjunction with Heritage’s October photography auction in New York City, OTE staff picked up some tips for collecting photographs. Rachel Peart, Heritage Director of Photography and Alice Sachs, the President of Art + Business Partners and an avid collector of photography, stressed a number of elements important for buyers to evaluate, whether purchasing from an auction or private sale.

The market for photography has remained relative stable over the last couple of years and as of June of this year ArtTactic reported the overall confidence in the market increased by 9 percent. Sales at auction have also increased. The Modern Photography market saw a 22 percent increase and the Vintage photography market had a particularly large increase of 125 percent, while the market for Contemporary photography remained the same from 2012 to 2013 (ArtTactic Photography Market Report January 2014). However, it is the Contemporary market that continues to drive sales at the top end. Prices for iconic photographers (i.e. Man Ray and Alfred Stieglitz) can get into the hundreds of thousands of dollars while a large percentage of sales are affordable, under $10,000.

The photography market is a tricky one. Collecting is often motivated by rarity and personal aesthetics, which makes paying attention to a photograph’s catalog description key.  This may seem basic, but interpreting how a photograph’s print date and the print type relate to an artist’s market is more confusing than it looks.  In a typical description of a photographic lot at auction there is the artist’s name followed by the italicized title and a date (in red in the example). This represents the 'negative date' – the date when the photographer took the image. 

Example of a catalog description from the Heritage October 16, 2014 Photographic Auction

Example of a catalog description from the Heritage October 16, 2014 Photographic Auction

Example of a catalog description from the Heritage October 16, 2014 Photographic Auction

Example of a catalog description from the Heritage October 16, 2014 Photographic Auction

The actual date when the photography was printed is usually found either next to or as a part of the type of print (gold star above). For the Bernice Abbott photograph above “Vintage” is the only indication of when the photograph was printed. Some photographs, like the Cindy Sherman photograph on the right, are accompanied by the exact printing date (also in red). The print date informs a collector about how the specific photograph fits into the timeline of an artist’s body of work. The context of a photograph produced significantly later than the negative date is different than one printed close to when the photograph was originally taken and is a variable to be taken into account when purchasing.

Here is a guide to non-specific print date references:

  • Vintage Print: printed within five years of the negative.
  • Early Print: printed within ten years of the negative.
  • Later Print: printed at least ten years after the negative.
  • Modern Print- printed many years after the negative.
  • Posthumous Print: printed after the death of the artist.
  • Contemporary Print: currently being printed.

How much the date of printing matters in the valuation of a photograph depends on the artist. Bill Brandt’s (British, 1904-1983) later prints are darker and are valued differently than his early prints. Some descriptions will specify the person who printed them. If someone other than the artist printed the photograph it can have a strong impact on value; positive or negative, depending on their relationship with the artist. Photographs by Ed Weston (American, 1886-1958) printed by his sons are considered valuable because they were trained by him and followed his methods, but if the photographs were printed by another party this would likely not be the case. The type of photograph (the process used to create the print) is a variable that should not be overlooked.

The most common types of photographs seen at auction are:

  • Gelatin Silver: a black and white print made from 1870s to the 20th century.
  • Chromogenic prints: (also referred to as C-prints) color prints made since 1940.
  • Dye Transfer: color prints made since 1928.
  • Digital prints: (also called Digital Inkjet prints) a printing process developed recently.

In looking at the type of print it is helpful to know an artist’s typical practice. While rarity is often a positive attribute, this is not true in all instances. Ansel Adams is well known for his gelatin silver photographs in black and white and though his color photographs are rarer they are not as well received at auction. Aesthetic considerations aside, successful purchasing decisions are often based on understanding what specifically to pay attention to for an individual artist.

This blog referenced information from:

 

Appraisal or Estimate? Why Free Is Not Always Better

I spoke with someone recently who told me how they got all their appraisals for “free” at auction houses. What they got were not really appraisals but estimates of value.

An estimate by an auction house will likely only reflect what the auction house believes the seller will receive at auction. These sorts of “appraisals” are not good for insurance purposes and are not viable in court. Most art insurance policies rely on the retail replacement value, meaning the compensation would be for the retail value  of an artwork, as opposed to the price at auction (which is usually lower than a retail value).

This article is by no means knocking auction houses, which have amazing experts and specialists, but it is important to understand that an auction house’s primary job is to sell art, and offering a free estimate is one way to draw in business.

If you go to an auction house and are not serious about selling with them but merely attaining a value this is probably not the best option for you. Although auction houses have a considerable amount of information at their disposal, they rarely have time to conduct extensive research into an artwork that is not being consigned to them. A free estimate is not necessarily giving your artwork the time and attention it deserves.

The case of Ravenna v. Christie's in 2001 is a good example of relying too heavily on a free estimate. Guido Ravenna sued Christie’s as a result of his wife’s meeting with an Old Master Specialist at Christie’s in New York after she was given mistaken information about the provenance of the painting. The Old Master’s specialist, after only seeing photographs of the work during their short meeting, valued it at between $10,000 to $15,000, as he thought it appeared to be the work of minor 17th Century Italian painter, Nuvolone. Ravenna, then sold the work for $40,000 to a dealer who only months later consigned the work to Christie’s. 

The Lamentation, by Ludovico Carracci

The Lamentation, by Ludovico Carracci

This is where it gets a little sticky. After the painting was examined again, it was determined to be a work not by Nuvolone but rather by Italian Baroque painter Ludovico Carracci, who is far more significant. The Lamentation, as it was renamed, was sold at auction in 2000 for $5,227,500 to the Metropolitan Museum of Art where it now resides. Ouch.

Heritage Auctions does a good job of explaining how auction house appraisals/estimates work:

“Usually, the request for an "appraisal" actually refers just to an evaluation for the potential value of an item through auction or private sale… Heritage regularly provides quick and free evaluations of the current market value of art or collectibles. This is in the form of a verbal or written auction estimate — the range of value that one would expect to see the item sell for in today's auction market. This valuation is not intended for use as a formal appraisal or for any purposes of establishing a value for insurance, tax, estate planning, collateral or third party transactions.” (Heritage Auctions - Defining Appraisals)

If you want to divest an artwork quickly, auction houses are the way to go. But if you are serious about finding out about the value of something you own, make sure you get an authentic written appraisal from a USPAP certified appraiser.