The Trick to Being a Collector

Rodger P Kingston, talking about the pictures in the "Coming Up at Christie's" post, wrote:

"As beautiful as these photographs are (and they are among my favorites), all it takes, in my opinion, is a copy of Beaumont Newhall and a whole lot of money to build a collection like this: great images reduced to being ingredients in a recipe for 'Standard Collection, Photographic Masterworks.' I looked at the catalog: not a surprise in the lot.

"Actually, it could have been a perfect gift to an institution just starting a photographic collection."

Mike replies: Rodger is a real collector. He knows.

Even though I'm not a collector myself, I know a fair amount about it. I was very lucky in this respect because I was very interested in books early in my life, and I read a number of the classic books about book collecting. They gave me a thorough grounding in the ins and outs of book collecting, ideas and principles which are easily transferable to collecting in other fields.

The main trick of collecting, unless you want to pay top dollar for everything you buy, is to choose something to collect that nobody else thinks is valuable yet.

Helmut Gernsheim, the great historian, began collecting 19th century British photography in 1945, before photography itself was considered collectible. To name just one of his great "scores," he discovered Lewis Carroll's albums of photographs of little girls, now essentially priceless, by chance in a junk shop. His huge collection now forms the core of the photographic holdings of the Humanities Research Center at the University of Texas Austin.

Albert C. Barnes, a pharmaceutical company owner, started collecting in 1912, and he chose paintings in a style that wasn't yet popular. Today we call it "Impressionism," and even in a culture gone mad for art it's the most collectible and most valuable kind. His fiercely disputed collection contains, among many other things, 181 works by Pierre-Auguste Renoir and 69 by Paul Cézanne. Later, he had the great good luck to sell his company in July of 1929, just before the stock market crash, which meant he was awash in cash during the Great Depression. The Barnes Collection also contains 59 works by Henri Matisse, and 46 by Pablo Picasso.

The unimaginative collector will lament that such opportunities are gone now. But that's not true. It's just that today's opportunities are unrecognized as yet. That's the fun of it—figuring out something you enjoy that other people aren't valuing yet.

Besides great imagination and your own distinct taste, here are the things you need in order to collect:

• A methodical and organized nature;
• Sufficient resources (which don't have to be enormous, of course—it depends on what you choose to collect. Rodger's collection is of vernacular photographs, such as snapshots, many of which can cost quite little money to purchase); and
• Sufficient space and facilities to store it safely and in an orderly fashion.
• A lot of energy and ongoing interest!

Am I missing anything? Maybe Rodger and other collectors in the audience can chime in.

Mike
(Thanks to Rodger)

Original contents copyright 2018 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

B&H Photo • Amazon US • Amazon UK
Amazon Germany • Amazon Canada • Adorama

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Kenneth Tanaka: "'Am I missing anything?' I think you've touched most of the big points, Mike.

I have not been infected with the art/photo collection virus myself but I am well acquainted with many highly accomplished collectors and have been close to the transfers of several magnificent photo collections during the past decade. And, of course, I am closely affiliated with one of the world's greatest museum collections, now over 22,000 pieces strong and growing. [Ken is unofficially but closely connected to the Art Institute of Chicago —Ed.] Here are my thoughts, some echoing yours, for what they're worth.

Collect what you like. That is, collect the type of works that you personally enjoy seeing and studying, regardless of expectations of future valuations. Every single successful collection I know has been built in just this manner. If you set out to collect photography with a primary goal of building wealth, you’re likely to be very sorry. If you are married or in a 'committed' relationship I also strongly encourage you to find a path that you can follow and equally enjoy with your partner. You’re likely to find that shared memories of your quests are more valuable than the loot you found.

Broaden your perspectives. The traditional Newhall-ish perspective on photography’s historical touchstones is (and always was) extremely limited and, today, being relegated to quaintness. Yes, you could probably still build a collection scaffolded by such a model (as Sir Elton John did). But you’re going to need an enormous budget and a very clever art consultant.

"I recommend plowing new, or at least less-traveled, ground. Of course if you fancy a forward view you can certainly find a variety of contemporary photography to purchase. Unfortunately as the art world is rapidly folding photography into 'contemporary art' some of the popular names are already becoming very expensive. But less chic contemporary names can still be found without too much trouble at accessible prices.

"If you fancy the rear-view there are two paths. First there are photographers whose work was, for various reasons, overlooked and under-exposed during their times. Some of these folks, now in their very late years or deceased, are beginning to get attention from dealers looking for new 20th century stuff to sell. Names like Fred Herzog, Marvin E. Newman, George Tice, and Evelyn Hofer come to mind although there are many others.

"The other rear-view path is to look outside the traditional American/European geographic boundaries of the Newhallian photo history. Africa and Asia also had photo histories, you know. But much of it has been overlooked by collectors and publishers until recently. That's changing with some rapidity, as work by established photographers such as Dayanita Singh and Daido Moriyama are becoming extremely popular in America and Europe. (I was recently involved in a project that helped to introduce 1960s-era studio photography from Bobo-Dioulasso into America, truly wonderful and fascinating stuff.) Collecting prints from these countries will often be a challenge, but the pain will be in the finding more than the buying.

"My own strategy: photo books."

Benjamin Marks: "I think there is one other thing: it helps if you have an overwhelming desire to own, to possess, that thing that is the next item in one's collection. My father was an art dealer and had many collectors as clients. They were all marked by a singular desire to possess that which they did not have and delight in what they did."

Comments

[Ken]

Timely article about collecting art, in light of your post:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/24/opinion/want-to-get-rich-buying-art-invest-in-women.html

[Richard Avery]

Herbert and Dorthy Vogel

[Daniel]

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/24/arts/design/herbert-vogel-postal-clerk-and-modern-art-collector-dies-at-89.html
These folks were Art Collectors. Not rich. Not even "well to do". They learned about art and collected works by newer artists. Over decades the built an art collection worth many millions.
Learn about art, visit artists and collect what you like as a steady, ongoing project. One piece at a time a collection is built. High value or not you will have work you enjoy viewing and owning.

[JG]

There are exceptions to every rule and when it comes to collecting art, that means Herb and Dorothy Vogel.

Although my photography collection is quite modest -- I have not paid more than $25 for any one print and most were obtained via trading loose prints with other photographers -- I like every one I have and enjoy viewing them on a regular basis.

[Randy Cole]

I think you missed stating that your advice is for those view their collection as an investment tool. For the rest of us, the best advice is to collect that which pleases you, whether you collect photographs or Santa salt shakers. It looks like that is what Roger is doing, and his collection may gain in value over time, but it will (hopefully) always give him pleasure.

[JG]

Oops! I have to correct my previous statement, as I remember now that I purchased one of Carl Weese's Pt/Pd prints (for which I paid more than $25) during a T.O.P. print sale back in 2010.

[Stephen S. Mack]

"A methodical and organized nature." Well, that lets me out. :>)

With best regards.

Stephen

[John Camp]

There's a reason for collecting "classic" photos -- they're usually pretty good art. And there's another way of doing it: collect signed "printed later" photos. I have two of Andre Kertesz' classic shots, and I don't think I paid more than $2,000 each for them back in the 90s. O. Winston Link's steam railroad photos were printed by the dozens, but well-printed, and are quite affordable. Paul Caponigro, celebrated for his printing technique, made quite a few copies of "Running White Deer," perhaps my favorite photo, and I bought a signed copy directly for $6,000. I don't know if Lange printed later any "White Angel Bread Line" images, but if she did, they may also be affordable.

Some collectors refuse to buy "printed later" photos because they claim that they do not represent the artist's initial and most valid impulse. I reject that idea -- I think the longer an artist looked at an image, the more mature his reaction might be. Ansel Adams' "Moonrise" -- and he may have printed a thousand of them -- are much more interesting in the dark, more dramatic later versions, IMHO. (I personally would not buy "estate printed" photos because the artist's own hand is not involved.)

So, if you like classic photos for the images, rather than for the potential market increase, check for "printed later" photos.

[Steve Rosenblum]

Here’s another somewhat ghoulish approach. Buy the works of well established, elderly artists. I didn’t do this intentionally , but, I bought an HCB signed print of a lesser known photograph of his because I love the image and the content has meaning for me. He died the next year and the value of the photograph immediately nearly doubled. Seems to be a predictable pattern, the same thing happened with a Motherwell lithograph that I bought. Again, I didn’t plan this as some kind of strategy, but I think a market pattern was revealed. =)

[Bear.]

IMHO, support young artists whose work you like and kill two birds, etc.

[Geoff Wittig]

You could do a lot worse than collecting one or two photographic prints each of a different technical form, with subject matter that dovetails with your æsthetic taste.

To be less obscure, T.O.P.'s print sales have so far permitted me to acquire beautiful photographs that include traditional gelatin silver prints, platinum/palladium, high-end pigment inkjet prints, and dye transfer prints. All are gorgeous images that tickle my fancy, and have provided me a kind of mini-gallery of the best current printing methods.

[Andrew Molitor]

Beware survivorship bias. Just because the successful collections did this and that does not mean that doing the same kinds of things will lead to success.

Indeed, consciously trying to "succeed" as a collector in any way other than to delight oneself is likely to become an exercise in frustration. Fred Herzog's pictures are very nice, but there are thousands, maybe 10s of thousands, of unknowns who also made very nice pictures in just the same vein.

The necessary ingredient in "success" beyond your personal delight is that someone important also collected the same things. Fred Herzog's success is due to his perfectly excellent work being discovered by someone with the power to canonize it. Wasn't there a recent discussion here about a photo that was accidentally canonized by, um, her name eludes me? Sorry.

Good art is common as grass.Maybe not that common, but there's a great deal of it. Someone has to canonize this bit and that bit in order to create the art market, and at the end of the day there is a strong element of "well, I own a bunch of it" and "the artist was very polite to me that day" and "oh hell, let's just flip a coin" involved.

Collect for your own delight, and let the rest fall where it may.