|
Pricing is always so difficult to decide. Carroll Michel noted in her book that price should not depend upon region, but realistically it must, I believe. I live in an area that is in general somewhat depressed economically and in which there is no tradition of portraiture. South of the Mason-Dixon line we might be, were someone to extend it eastwards to the Atlantic, but in philosophy we're a hybrid. My first commissioned portrait went for $200 and a spotting scope and I agonized over the $200: too much, too little, just right? I was thrilled to be asked - and by a world-famous birder, no less - to paint his wife. I gradually raised my prices (which are listed on my site on the process page) but am still far below Michele and Cathy, and I don't know whether increasing them would garner me more attention and more work, or frighten off the people who are toying with the idea of having a portrait painted. Currently my feeling is that I should put off any increase until I actually have a waiting list; perhaps this is foolhardy, though.
I am well aware that I can't make a living off my portraiture at those prices and thankfully I don't need to. My husband is about to retire and I have been retired since 2000; both of us worked in school systems and have quite solid pensions. My art is my pleasure and the source of extra money but not a necessity. And I would rather be painting commissions for less money and have more of them, because each commission teaches me something new and offers a fresh experience. Were I in a different situation vis-a-vis money I'm still not sure I would be charging more; I don't think my current clientele and the area could support it until there's more demand for those services.
|
Threaded Mode
