(as ABBA put it). I’ve continued my musing about the problem of what to charge for my work, with interesting results. It struck me that it might be useful to check more widely to see what people are charging for their work, and I decided that it would be worth my while to look at the prices that are bering charged on various internet, on-line, sites. (There are quite a few of them around these days.) The result was, to some extent, contradictory.
My earlier shock, based on the prices requested by a couple of local artists, seems to be justified, as invariably the internet sites are charging well above the prices asked by my colleagues.* On the other hand, it does appear that the rule-of-thumb with which I have been operating in the past could well be on the high side for this part of the world.
Today I chanced upon a solution. Broadly speaking, I have been estimating the price of my pictures on the basis of their area. Once I reduce this calculation to include only the area of the image itself, and not that including the frame, it all looks a lot more reasonable.
It would be interesting to hear from any colleagues out there who have wrestled with this dilemma, and to hear how they have resolved it for themselves.
*See my posting of two days ago.