Degree Of Difficulty

"Does (or should) the degree of difficulty required to create a piece of art affect its perceived artistic worth or value?"

Only in a few instances. Ultimately a piece has to stand on it's own. How long it took or how hard it was to achieve may be of passing interest in an introduction, but all of that eventually falls away. The piece holds up as art or it doesn't.

Possible exception: The famous shots of earth from the moon. There is nothing artistically crazy-good or mind-bending about them. Anyone standing there with a camera could have taken those shots. But the human achievement those represent, and their rarity, puts them among the most iconic photographs ever taken.


Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

I think 'internally' between other photogs, artists...the degree of difficulty or the purist perception thereof does affect the opinion of the perceived value of a work but not what should be the actual value,there is always a 'snooty' aspect to factor in.

I don't think the public cares at all what it took, how long or much about the process, only if they like the end result.

Galleries seem to mostly care only about an artist's name or work as it relates back to potential income, not what the actual 'artistic' value maybe, just the monetary value (because they are a business).

Maybe museums care more about the methodology and artistic value more.

Absolutely true, Dan. While they might not be technically masterful, they are definitely iconic and inspirational. But how valuable are they (in a monetary sense) when the government gives them away? ;-)

difficulty will only be recognized by the people who do that craft. a common person, probably won't care.

cheesecake from the store or one made fresh from a baker - they taste the same to most people

look at the work sold here, you have the mountainscape with the great light. or the bad light, the common person would say - hey - nice mountain. and not notice the difference between either one.

sometimes it doesn't have to be complicated to be good or to sell.

i would love to find that perfect timing, light, objects etc. but realistically, i won't hang out in a duck blind, wake up at 4 am, stand on one leg, etc, not worth it. i'll modify later on.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

While I didn't make the distinction in the first post, I imagine I'm talking about reactions of those who make or sell art.

This is sort of a restatement of the classic artist bias -- painters vs. photographers, ... or dancers vs. painters, ... or any other comparison where one group might view its degree of difficulty as more than another, and then elevate THEIR art form while demoting another art form.

As a dancer, I can tell you that I once thought that my level of physical difficulty far elevated me above any other visual artist. ... I used to feel that the fleeting nature of my dancing placed it on a different plane of prestige, as art goes. ... I gave no importance to photography or video taping, since I thought that these merely faked what the reality of in-the-moment dancing art is.

Sometimes, it boils down to how we DEFINE "difficult" - does this mean "how many calories you are burning?" , "mentally taxing?", .... "tedious and sedentary?", ... "tedious and muscularly demanding?"

There are different types of difficulty. ... I am not sure that it is a good idea to lump them all together anymore.

Perhaps not the highest level to use as an example but a few years ago my wife and I took our dog and children to have a portrait taken together. Our dog, (a Lab) was just wild, pulling jumping, barking and so on. I thought OMG this is a disaster and a complete waste of time! Somehow after the session the photographer ended up with a great shot of the kids sitting with their well behaved dog. I have no clue how this was done but strongly suspect the use of magic! I know for a fact I could of never done such a thing!

I hadn't imagined that one who came from a physical-performance background would have similar thoughts toward other art forms. Interesting, Robert.

I agree that the art being examined has something to do with it. Take the instrumentalist, for example. To be a true virtuoso, you need BOTH technical mastery and masterful interpretive expression to rise to the pinnacle, in most cases.

Of course, that doesn't account for the success of some, like Blind Boy Grunt. AKA Bob Dylan. AKA Robert Allen Zimmerman

Studies have shown that people spend more time looking at artwork that is perceived to have taken longer to create. Anything that makes the viewer wonder "how did they do that'' raises the value.

I think if the viewer sees something and says "I could do that" it lowers the value.

That's interesting, Edward. I feel the opposite.

From my profile: "I don't want the viewer to ask 'How did he do that'? I prefer that the craft remain invisible. For me, the camera, lens and post-processing should not be evident in the image; only the soul of the subject."

People do not see the labor or want to but everyone knows more costs more but do not want to know the amount of difficulty.

Now if you look at some of the world's fastest humans the world records seem very relaxed and effortless. This is because the best in everything alway's appear to be effortless.

A magician makes an elephant disappear and the results are all the public wants or needs to know.

How long it took or how difficult it was to create - people don't need to know - they simply need to appreciate the work/art that is presented. What is difficult for me is oh so easy for someone with much more experience and understanding of the medium they are using. That I use a Nikon 3100 or 3200 is moot if I don't know much more than to push the button to snap the shot - "I" think that I'm pretty good with composition - which to me counts a lot. I use a much simpler, to me, photo editing program and not anything Adobe puts out - I found it difficult to use photoshop - and I have an old copy on disc somewhere in some drawer. How difficult I find it to go out and shoot vs someone who gets up at O dark thirty in the morning with their whole shoot planned - my shots are primarily from choices of what I want to do for the day - it might lead to a good photo - but perhaps not. Usually when I plan a specific shoot - the weather misbehaves or the car won't start.

Let's just say that I agree with Dan T.

When I think about degree of difficulty in a field of endeavor, I think about mastering technique. This may not be what you had in mind in your original question. Mastering the technical aspect of an art form can range from easy to extremely difficult depending on the persons native abilities. There are some who say one can not become creative or inventive, push the envelope etc etc. until the technical aspects are mastered first. To me what make something inspiring is the creativity part of it. Sometimes I am awed by technical mastery if it is outstanding, but without soul the technical difficulty is not enough. I guess I would also say the "soul" part of it is something very difficult but does not have anything to do with the technical degree of difficulty.

Murray,
There never was a realistic comparison between painters and shutter snappers other than the fact that a lot of painters save a lot of time and energy by using the work photographers have provided.

The answer is it absolutely depends......

When selling live a compelling story of how the image was captured can and does lead to sales. (I have made sales that way..)

On the net, I don't think it matters to the buyer at all assuming they don't think, I could have taken that.

Now, from a personal standpoint it matters a lot to me. I personally enjoy the challenge. The harder it is to get the more fun I had producing it. The more fun I have producing it the more value it has to me. It does NOT change my price point but it has more value to me.

Murray, interesting question you pose, my first gut reaction to that is No, it should not matter. I think that the art should stand on it's own as Dan stated. Here ia a copper sculpture I made some time ago, who can say how difficult or easy it was to make, except me, unless you watched me make it? did it take me 10 hours or 3 weeks to complete.? This was made with copper that was heated to 2000 degrees and if you notice the doors on the phone booth open and close and they were made of real glass, any idea what happens to glass when exposed to that level of heat? You wouldn't believe the size of the pile of shatter glass I ended up with when I finally finished the sculpture. Does the person who ends up buying the piece really care? maybe but I would have to convince him that what I'm saying is actually true.





Here is another one called Tree in the Atrium. again this one had a lot of glass and I had to heat the copper while the glass was touching the copper at 2000 degrees. This pile of scrap glass was even larger.



But then giving it more thought, I want to say that the value of a thing is very relative to the person and the situation and this goes even beyond the perceived value of just art. Here's what I mean, I often have customers call my home repair business and tell me a problem they have with their garbage disposal, I know the problem well, I quote them a price over the phone they are very happy to pay and have me come out right away to fix it, $95, no problem.

I have a work order already made out with all the particulars and the customer is also happy to sign it once I arrive before work starts. I then pull out a singe little tool and get under the customers sink and as soon as I do, I fix the problem, 2 minutes flat, tops. It's time to get paid, most will pull out cash or their check book and no problem, they even become regular customers.

Some though will venture and say your going to charge me $95 dollars for 2 minutes of work? some have said, 'you know that works out to $5,700. an hour" to which I answer I don't charge by the hour, I charge by the job.

Even a better example of what I'm talking about is something called the "Call Girl Principle" Call girls and ladies of the evening know this principle well and that's why they always charge their customers in advance . I know this because I was in law enforcement and no other reason. But the principle assumes this " The value of a service rendered diminishes once the service has been provided and with the passing of time" This is a very true manner in which humans perceive value , maybe even in art.

As decor purpose matters more. Does it look good in the living room? Will it fit between the windows the dining room?

How long it took or how hard was it to make? Value? Using a camera and then Photoshop is not a shortcut compared to painting a masterpiece. Picasso painted masterpieces very often within about four hours. He did so daily. Other painters needs weeks. Those painters that need weeks are not part of how I gauge my work. Why would they be?

I think comparisons on any level are only destructive.

Mike, myself and other folks who extensively use PS have had to get up a very tough learning curve. Once up the curve the work comes faster and better.

This is like learning to play the piano. You imagine how difficult it is to play the scales. You sit at the piano for a few months sounding very bad at playing it. Then you start to make better noises out of it. You finally begin to see the patterns in more complex music. You play with ease. Was it easy to play the piano? Not a fair question. Do you prefer a teenager who is okay playing the piano at the high school recital? Or do you want to see the old pro at Carnegie Hall play Chopin? Both have their place in this world. But who is getting paid to play?

Dave

Dave, speaking of easy. In the following video is my cardiac surgeon. He repaired my beating heart when I underwent quadruple bypass surgery two years ago. If you watch the video, note where he refers to this kind of surgery as 'easy.'

If you think of how long a image captures the attention of the viewer as value, complexity wins. Modern art like Hirst spot paintings seem to only capture people's attention for five seconds. I guess the viewer "gets it" quickly and moves on. Where as an image with more visual complexity causes them to stop longer to figure out what's going on.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1365672/Modern-art-How-gallery-visitors-viewed-work-Damien-Hirst-Tracy-Emin-5-seconds.html

If someone is interested enough in the image that they want to look at the description and figure out "how dey do dat?", you're probably more likely to to get a sale or at least increase the interest in your work. Snapshot? Slide left.

also difficult is really only relevant to the person doing it.

you can rent a car, rent a boat drive it down to a nice lake, wait till sunrise, use the boat as a still life, and for you it was a lot of work. then you notice someone next to you getting the scene you just set up. they live right there, takes out a cell phone and gets the same shot. most of the work wasn't needed because they are already there. in the end you might have the exact same shot, only one person worked harder.

for complexity, as long as its not hard on the eyes, i think its a good idea to make them look around for a while. it keeps a piece interesting, where they may not have noticed the detail the first time. in the past, when i was on a critique site, everyone seemed to only like the super simple bland things. they didn't like complex, i always found that odd. they called scenes with too much stuff, busy. but i only consider busy images having too many themes going on. if you have one theme with lots of stuff, then its ok.

i've sold certain things a number of times, or it was stolen a number of times, yet i have others using that same formula, and don't sell and isn't stolen. so whatever it was i did with the first one, it was enjoyed a lot more. so in the end, complex etc, people still liked what they like.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Yeah, its easy to forget how much time and effort one put in to learn a skill. After awhile it seems easy and you wonder why everyone can't do X. Especially if you are caught up in a certain world. Its easy to forget not everyone thinks about art all the time. They have their own world they live in most of the time and perhaps take the occasional break to buy or look at art.

.....

I sold this tractor photograph today. Its going to Denver. For me it was rather easy to find such a scene in my neighborhood. For someone in Denver, not so much.

"How long did it take you to make this thing?"

Oh! how many times have I heard that question!!


Of course, degree of difficulty, whether it's "Time", "Process" or "Skill", has a significant input in the value of any given piece.


BUT, by , it is not the only factor

"EYE TICKLING" (putting it crassly) must be there.


(note: I had planned to expound, but I've just decided to leave it as it stands)

My degree of difficulty is that I am interested in a subject matter that the average consumer has zero interest in buying.

I do mostly street photography...candid images of people in the public domain...I take pics of people while I am in my car and I use a telephoto lens. This is all rather difficult as "timing is everything." With this method (forced on me by old age and sport related injuries) I both capture good images and miss good images (I can't stop the car in the middle of the street)....

I am usually in an area noted for its mentally ill and somewhat violent people. Some of these folks have threatened me with destruction and death. But what I do is legal so I press on.

Problem is not many street photographers earn a living (I don't have to), or even earn money from this type of photography (I don't). Who wants to display an image of a mentally deranged man or woman in their house? In my house, my wife displays my images of our pets and outdoor song birds.

For that matter, I no longer display my street photography here on Pixels.com (zero interest by buyers).

I have some 4 thousand images (mostly candid pic of people) here: bobby angel flickr
Flickr is the home of the street photographer as my pals and I have tens of thousands of such images on display....

As for the difficulty of doing what I do....I don't care if its difficult or not. It's what I do for whatever personal reasons. I grew up poor and on the street. I am no longer poor but I still am on the street.

The general public is impressed by difficulty, well not so much difficulty as skill. The more skill they perceive as required to produce the art the more impressed they are. That's why one of the biggest compliments a viewers thinks they are making when looking at a painting or a drawing is to say "It looks like a photograph." (I cringe every time I here that, none of my art looks anything like a photograph). They perceive realistic art (painting and drawing) as being more difficult to create. Whether that's a factor in sales or not I don't know, but I suspect it is for some. For photography, I'm not sure it's really possible for the lay-man to perceive a variation in skill required between one photo and another in most cases. Of course artists are always interested in process and I guess skill required to achieve something in particular does impress us, just straight up difficulty not so much, except as an indicator of the dedication of the artist.

Murray,

Your heart surgeon summed it up extremely well.

Imagine framing a house using a rock and nails. Then imagine using the latest hammer and nails. The leverage of the hammer speeds the job up and makes it much more easy.

Picasso was not into finger painting. He fooled some folks though.

Dave

At a restaurant BBQ Ribs cost about the same as a steak dinner and a glass of wine about the same as a beer or a mixed drink. People judge via the results of their taste and satisfaction with their purchase and never by the degree of difficulty in the making of the product.

Like the Super Bowl the looser may have worked harder than the winner but
the winner is all they care about at the moment. It's about perception of value.

A minimal painting appearing as a round black spot on an all white canvas costing a million and then a complicated geometric abstraction on another canvas may be valued at less than a thousand. It's really a crap shoot without rhyme, reason or any rules at all.

I used to keep track of the hours it took me to create each painting. ... I logged the hours each day, and I noted it in my journal.

I could always tell anybody "how long" it took me, in terms that they could relate to.

The real answer, however, is ... "it has taken me all my life up til now, plus all the time that the universe has taken to come into existence before I was even born."

I hear dogs can sniff out cancer. I hear that some clinics have employed dogs as part of their staff of early warning technicians. Imagine the pure efficiency of a dog taking a quick sniff at your crotch instead of having to go though a gamut of blood tests and CAT scans.

"ARF ARF!"

"What's that Lassie? ---- A tumor?"

"ARF ARF!"

"Lassie --- Is it malignant?"

"ARF ARF!"

Perhaps in a not too distant future, in an almost perfect world, the next phase of the screening would be to have dyes injected into the blood stream to isolate the affected cells so that they could be viewed on a computer screen via camera and laser, inserted into the least offensive --- but most accessible --- orifice. Once the affected cells have been located, simply click the EDIT box, select ALL, and then simply scroll on down and click either CUT or DELETE.

Perhaps one day in the not too distant future, even photography, in an almost perfect world, will be as easy as surgery.

Until then I think most people, though they might not admit it, do recognize the hard work and difficulty of obtaining a good photograph. If it is something that anyone can do, then anyone aught to be at the right place at the right time with their camera at the ready when the epiphany occurs. If they don't have the time or the foresight; then I'd say they didn't really want to take the picture in the first place and that they'd rather pay someone else to make the effort for them.

Your hard work does matter, and it is worth something.

Oh; and by the way, let me introduce you to your new proctologist: ---- HEEERE BRUTUS !

Karl,

Rats are better cancer sniffers than dogs. Dogs well trained are great at it and even without any training a dog can tell a good human from a jerk.

Rather have a dog scan than a cat scan.

Dave

This painting took all of three minutes to create.


And this painting took all day with multiple applications.


I know it's bad and lacks imagination, but it took so much time, I had to download it.

The difference between the paintings is size. If I do a large painting, I'm very comfy and knowing about how to work the brush as many of my paintings are taller and wider than six feet. But when I work on small canvas' I'm at a loss, it's like a completely different set of skills.

Now, as a matter of difficulty, none of my work is that. It's atmospheric decorative wall art that sells very well around my neighborhood. That's all it is.

I would guess that a matter of difficulty should make the painting more valuable, but am not entirely sure. I find the thread interesting though.

When it comes to photographic art, it's not the time effort or your talent that gives the art value or merit, it's how expensive the camera was that took the photo! Can't count how many times I've herd someone say this about one of my photographs they liked, "Wow that's a great picture, you must have a really expensive camera."

Gotta love it! LOL

for me its the other way around. they see the big camera and assume the pictures will of course look great. then they proceed to show me their junk camera or phone. one lady started showing me pictures on her phone like i cared. meanwhile i'm struggling with bad backgrounds and terrible lighting.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com