“Early Spring field”
Acrylic on panel
24×24 in
2012

This painting is available for purchase. 

“Early Spring, Lake Huron”
Acrylic on panel
24×24 in
2012

This painting is available for purchase. 

“Sound of Autumn”
36 x 36 in
Acrylic on canvas
2012

This painting is available for purchase. 

“Sunset over water”
12 x 12 in
Acrylic on panel
2012

The painting is available for purchase, $150 unframed, $200 framed. 

“Reflecting on Autumn”
12 x 12 in
Acrylic on panel
2012

This painting is available for purchase, $150 unframed, $200 framed. 

Everything costs money. Even money costs money. When you’re asked to help raise it, how do you decide if it’s worthwhile or if your generosity is being taken advantage of?

At some point every emerging artist is invited to participate in a charitable or cultural event as a partner, or reads a call for participation on sites like Akimbo or Canada Arts Connect, where their work is donated for auction— often for nothing more than the promise of exposure. Many articles have been written on whether or not participating in events like these is actually in the best interest of the artist or artists in general. I believe that each artist, depending the stage of their career, should weigh the pros and cons for each call on it’s own merit. I’d like to share what I’ve learned over the years, to help make evaluating these calls easier for the emerging artist, and as a public service to help organizations write proposals that are more equitable and attractive to artists.

Over the past several years I have participated in both organizing and marketing cultural events as well as participating in them as a cultural partner— everything from Museum London’s “Museum Underground” initiative, promotions for the Grand Theatre, a brand revamp of the Fanshawe Pioneer Village, the London Poetry Slam, London Fringe’s Petite Nuit Blanche and The London Short Film Showcase’s board to name a few. Within these roles I have authored and responded to many Calls for Submission/Participation and have learned from internal and external perspectives what constitute fair proposals and which ones are simply uncompensated asks.

Compensation Styles

From my perspective, for an emerging artist these events are an opportunity for networking, marketing and audience building. As stated, often all an organization provides is the promise of exposure, but as my grizzled artist friend always likes to say “people die from exposure.” The conceptual razor that should always be used is “Is the artist being compensated?” Ultimately, as a professional artist, money is the king of all forms of compensation but there are others:

Social Capital— Perhaps you have enough money, or you simply don’t care about money. Contributing to a social cause and being publicly recognized as an all around great person is one intangible form of compensation that can be cashed in later for assistance in your own projects. Cool attracts cool. Remember, if you are planning on marketing the event via Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc you are effectively giving marketing services for free to the event. Many organizations rely on this advertising, and it has a cash value to them. You are in essence lending them your social capital. Of course, if the organization has a lot more social capital than you do, more of their “whuffie” will likely get transferred back to you in the process. That’s how social capital works.

Exposure— Ah, good old exposure. Getting your name out in the marketplace is important, but make sure you get details on where the event will be advertised. How many impressions? Is there an opportunity to give a small statement or interview to a newspaper, and if so ask if you can be that person. Is the exposure primarily online? Will your name be sent to an email distribution list of the organization’s supporters? Check the organization’s social media history to ensure you want to be publicly associated. If the exposure is something that you can get without participating consider your decision carefully.

Networking— Sometimes the media exposure it not the primary benefit of participating in an event. If you are from an economically disadvantaged social class (and as an artist, let’s face it, there’s a good chance you are) then getting to rub elbows with the monied, art-buying classes is part of your compensation for giving people who don’t need a deal on art a deal.

In-kind— At the very least, an organization should be providing free entry into the event— tickets for you AND your spouse/partner— or a cash value of in-kind services/products for your donation. If the event is being sponsored by a private business, they can trade your donation for inventory which costs them less than full-market value, leaving them still ahead in the transaction while treating you fairly.

Experience— By participating are you going to have an experience you have never had or could not have otherwise? Will you get to see an amazing musical act who is sponsoring the event as well? Hear a great speaker? Go someplace you’d never be welcome otherwise? Often, the best things in life are simply the experience of being there.

Money— Cash is king. Make sure, however, that the compensation is fair. Will they pay artist’s right if it’s an exhibition opportunity? (ie. rent for displaying your art). Are they auctioning your artwork? Are they splitting the proceeds with you? Are there other cultural partners for the event such as a band, or speaker— if they are being paid so should you. Never play for free when other people are being paid.

The secret is weighing each of these forms of compensation against each other. Sometimes there’s more of one than the others, and depending on where you are in your career, financial considerations may be trumped by the others. However— never forget this— making a living is your number one goal, and to do that you need to be paid. Do everything you can to maintain fair market value for your artwork and that of your peers. Often, the number one obstacle facing artists is other artists or the artists themselves.

Compensation Models

I often field questions from audience members at events, before, during and after. Not to belabour the point (I want to make sure you get it), the number one question from patrons who bid on artwork is I have fielded is “Are the artists paid?” Patrons who bid on artwork often express their disappointment if none of the money raised is directed towards the artists. Other commenters have expressed the opinion that they would bid higher on specific pieces if they had know that some of the money goes to the artists.

One individual, who has been a past patron of my art, has stated that they are always happy to bid higher than they know they know they could secure my artwork for at an event, simply knowing the fair market value of the work. (They know who they are and how much I appreciate their candour and generosity.)

Before determining is a call is fair compensation don’t forget to consider all your expenses: Who is paying for insurance of the work? Who is responsible for shipping costs?

Pay to play— this is the simplest. A straight up fee is paid to the artist for the value of the artwork, or services rendered. Ensure all of your costs are being met— you should NEVER have to pay to participate, or incur material or service costs you cannot recuperate.

Tax Receipts— Sometimes an organization really is hard up for money, but would like to compensate you for the value of your work. If you anticipate that you may have to pay tax this year, or if you still want to help despite not being paid, most charities are only too happy to write a tax receipt for the market value of your donation. Don’t be shy— value your work accordingly.

Split proceeds silent auction— This is perhaps the most common model I see. Your art is auctioned and a percentage goes to you, and a percentage to the event. I cannot say this enough times— the artist’s split should always be greater than the organization’s. Period. You incurred the expenses, you did the work, you should get paid fairly. Understanding that there is a fixed cost to produce your artwork, ask to set a reserve bid if they aren’t already doing so. That way, if the artwork doesn’t sell you will at least incur no costs. If the reserve bid is not met then you get to keep your art. Simple.

Reserve and surplus— This take on the silent auction is a personal favourite. You set a reserve bid— I recommend full market value— and you get to keep the full amount of the reserve bid if it’s met, and the organization keeps the full amount over and above the reserve. Everybody wins.

Tithed— Sometimes, an organization, particularly if it’s an art show and sale, will have a charitable partner they are planning to support. In this case, all sales are handled by the event in your name, and you pay a percentage back to the event. The genius of this approach is that not only do you set your price, but you are often eligible for a tax receipt for your tithe from the beneficiary charity. It’s like the icing on the cake.

One last word regarding auctions, there is always a min-max analysis that an experienced venue or organization can do over time to fine-tune the ratio of profit sharing appropriate to a silent auction that most gainfully respects the fund-raising goals, fair artist compensation and the innate need for bidders to understand how their funds are allocated. Sometimes, at best, a publicly-advertised revenue-sharing can encourage more and higher bids, and more importantly can curtail the worst-case scenario where a target audience perceives an event to be inequitable, driving down ticket sales and impacting other fund-raising initiatives as a result.

An Alternative Approach— Timeraiser

One organization who organizes the fairiest and most productive calls for participation is Timeraiser. Their model is a four-ring circus:

Timeraiser— pays full market value for donated artwork to the artist, with funds raised from corporate sponsors. Timeraiser then organizes events where patrons bid with volunteer hours for the artwork.

Charitable partners— are the ultimate recipients of the donations. They receive volunteers from the event who have one year to complete their time commitment to the charity in exchange for the artwork.

Corporate sponsors— donate money to the event, and in return get media exposure and possession of the artwork to decorate their offices during the year while the volunteers complete their pledged hours.

Patrons— get a fun night out on the town, get to network with non-profits, get to feel that warm glow from doing good and at the end of the year receive a “free” work of art.

Win. Win. Win. Win.

What really prompted me to share all of this with you was a call for participation I recently received from the Canadian Diabetes Association/Banting House to participate in this year’s annual “Banting and Friends” fundraiser. Sir Frederick Banting himself was an artist and avid supporter and patron of the arts— friend of the Group of Seven no less— who understood the need for artists to be compensated fairly. As you surely know, the average salary of a professional artist in Canada is much lower than the average salary in almost any other field, and artists are sadly perhaps one of the economic groups least likely to be able to afford to give charitably, who are one of the most often asked, and who are surprisingly, among the most willing to do so when called.

Banting House has produced one of the fairest, most considered and equitable calls for participation I have seen in my long arts-related career, spanning nearly 22 years of active professional support, personal practice and volunteerism. In particular, I was most impressed by the section they have drafted on institutional responsibilities. I think it most eloquently expresses what is considered the best practices in such endeavours.

I have included the call here so you can read it for yourself.

In closing, there are many ways for an artist to be compensated. When evaluating any opportunities that pass your way keep in mind that if you want to eat, you need to be paid. As long as you let yourself be treated unfairly then there will always be starving artists— and nobody really wants that— least of all us, the artists.

Why I’m participating— an atheist’s perspective on the intersection of faith and art.

Currently ArtsVoice London is seeking to engage with artists to participate in a 3-day workshop “Way of the Streets” to create works of public art that address issues of social justice within the urban context. The opportunity to work alongside 13 other artists in freely voicing our observations and social concerns through public art is a rare and valuable chance to engage with the broader community in a fresh and exciting way. I personally believe that, as an artist, I have a responsibility to give back to my community by exercising my freedom to speak out and by doing so, to help open lines of dialogue on these important issues.

When I explain the project to my peers I have, however, found myself being greeted with a skeptical raising of eyebrows. Anyone who knows me personally understands that I am not a person of faith and that for me to be participating in a faith-inspired arts program seems contradictory— heretical even. Judging by the relatively lukewarm response to the call for participation, it would seem that this skepticism is relatively widespread, as if some artists are dismissing the opportunity to participate because they believe that the exercise is dogmatically tainted by the association with the Church. For this reason, I’d like to share my perspective on the event and my personal reasons for participating.

In our culture’s development for the past two thousand years (the relatively socialist past 50 years notwithstanding), the church in all it’s denominations, with all it’s perceived missteps in other areas, has been the primary dispenser of social justice in our society. In organizing shelter for the homeless and displaced, in providing day-care services, in raising aid for foreign and domestic relief, in speaking out against tyranny by speaking truth to power around the world, for securing access to medical care, for hospice and assisted housing for the sick and elderly and for providing education to those who most need it the church should be applauded. Whether or not you disagree with a particular faith’s stance on the issues that continue to divide us, the actions of faith-based organizations in addressing issues of social justice can hardly be denied. In the balance, I honestly believe that organizations like Bishop Cronyn are a positive influence in our society.

While the call for the “Way of the Streets” collaboration is based on the themes of the Stations of the Cross, it is not a call for artists to create works that are necessarily Christian in message or manner, but simply to use the themes of the Stations as a jumping off point to highlight secular issues that affect the City of London. As a student of literature and art I understand that the Bible— in the same fashion that a concordance acts like an index to the scripture— acts uniquely as a concordance for a vast amount of our culture’s artistic legacy. The venerated old masters in art and literature largely drew their inspiration from the Bible, and for long periods of history were commissioned via the church’s patronage to create public works of art that explored the universal themes present within the text to encourage socially-just action and greater understanding of the individual’s relationship to their community. Religion is not simply about preparing oneself for the afterlife, but also about creating a just society— a “heaven on earth”— for everyone during our short lifetimes. The themes in the scripture are universal themes; as a document it is a primary source that continues to inform our morality, legal system, social conscience and in no small part, our artistic understanding.

I myself will be exploring issues of urban renewal, and proactive approaches to urban design that create livable spaces through an examination of the concept of open and closed spaces within an urban context, and a critical reflection on the dichotomy of space as emptiness versus space as a wholeness in its own right. You might ask, “How does this relate to the Stations of the Cross?” My own creative jumping off point is the final Station— Jesus is laid in the tomb— but as you can see, the issue addressed is not a religious one, but a secular, social one. In no way have I been limited by the inspiration to narrow the focus to a religious context. As an artist, I really do have to applaud the openness of Bishop Cronyn Memorial and their willingness to embrace diversity of voice in the ArtsVoice call for participation– for a non-believer I consider it quite bold.

Ultimately, as an artist I enjoy a broad freedom of speech and thought— in reality no broader than that which we all hold sacrosanct— but perhaps perceived so simply because it is exercised in a broader public context. While at times my work may challenge dearly held beliefs, I deeply respect the freedom I have to do so, and freely enter into dialogue, critical or otherwise, of my practice. As an artist I have a role to open new avenues of communication, not close them. I welcome this opportunity to do so.

On a personal note, I have previously collaborated in similar calls with science as the primary thematic anchor. While I believe that for many issues the rational, scientific method is the most appropriate approach, I would feel that I would be intellectually dishonest if I was not open to listening and considering conflicting viewpoints. The human experience ranges broadly, and in some way is not complete if it fails, in a spirit of openness and mutual respect, to take the full measure of that experience by exploring the possibilities that lie at opposite poles of understanding.

I encourage any artist that is considering participating, or who has dismissed the opportunity out of hand for doctrinal reasons, to reconsider and join me in shining a spotlight on issues that affect all Londoners, regardless of faith. It promises to be a fun, eye-opening weekend, with a point.

nik

Image by Donnie Claudino (Fb link)

Painted in the first round— the OPEN round where I was free to paint whatever I wanted.

“Open”
18×18 in
Acrylic on canvas
2012

Photograph by Joe Martz

This painting is in the private collection of Carol Moogk-Soulis. 

Painted in the final round— the SPEAK round where each of the three finalists interpreted the word “swell”

“Swell”
18×18 in
Acrylic on canvas
2012

Photograph by Joe Martz

This painting is in the private collection of Carol Moogk-Soulis. 

Painted in round 3— the HEAR round where each of 10 artists interpreted a short clip of music.

“Here”
18×18 in
Acrylic on canvas
2012

Photograph by Joe Martz

This painting is in the private collection of Amanda & Kyle Zinger.