Andrey Vrady, Reconquista @Sputnik

JTF (just the facts): A total of 14 color works (13 single images and 1 triptych), mounted but not framed, and hung in the single room gallery and the small back office area. All of the images are archival digital inkjet prints on Baryta paper, made in 2009, and printed in editions of 3, 4 or 5. The works come in a variety of sizes, but no dimensions were available. (Installation shots at right.)

Comments/Context: If we ask ourselves where the largest wide open white spaces for experimentation in contemporary photography reside, the use of digital manipulation must clearly be among the most promising territories for new exploration. I’m not talking about the now ubiquitous digital clean-up, color correction, and sharpening (which we tend to lump into “photoshopping” with a mix of anxiety and disdain); I’m referring to a complete rethinking of how photographic imagery can be used as a starting point for computer-constructed picture making, where photography moves back toward painting, with digital files taking the place of paints on a palette.
.
Andrey Vrady has stepped out into the digital unknown by borrowing a relatively simple but powerful idea found in centuries of Islamic art: begin with a straightforward geometric form and multiply it out into a kaleidoscope of complex ornamental patterns. But instead of using delicate hand painted flowers or lattices of carved lines as his raw material, Vrady uses snapshots of everyday city streets and parks, employing mirroring and refraction to make cars, buses, crosswalks, snowy trees, and airplanes in flight into complicated arabesques. His photographs are like walls of Iznik tiles: up close, the spare forms come into focus, but from ten feet, the images are transformed into dense, hyperactive abstractions, full of kinetic energy. While most of the works are rigidly symmetrical, a few take the copying of geometries further into lacy whorls that spin off like Persian fractals.
.
Calling an artwork decorative is often considered the ultimate backhanded compliment, an ugly slap from the more high minded toward work that is deemed too pretty and/or vacant of more profound ideas. Vrady’s photographic geometries are indeed overtly eye catching and decorative, and yet, I think there is a nugget of an intriguing conceptual framework hiding here as well. While not every image in this show is completely successful, the best of the works are those that push the limits of complexity, that multiply the repetitions into rushing cascades of pattern. The reason they are interesting is that they go beyond what the masters of Islamic art did in stone, mosaic and paint; they use the digital tools to make images that resonate with the traditions of the past, but in a wholly modern form. This is a show that seems like a prelude, an appetizer that makes you look forward to the main course; Vrady has made a good start with these images, but with further refinements and evolutions of the main concept, I think where he goes next may be even more surprising.

Collector’s POV: The works in this show are priced between $1300 and $5000 (for the triptych), with nearly every image having a different price along this spectrum, apparently roughly based on size. Vrady has no secondary market history, so interested collectors will need to follow up at retail. In general, I think these images would fit well into collections of contemporary city/street photography (like ours), as well as more cutting edge collections of digitally manipulated contemporary work.

Rating: * (one star) GOOD (rating system described here)

Transit Hub:

  • Principles of Islamic Art and Design (here)
Through January 16th

547 West 27th Street
New York, NY 10001

Man Ray: Trees + Flowers – Insects Animals

JTF (just the facts): Published in 2009 by Steidl (here). 370 pages, with 320 images and drawings. Includes a preface by the author (John Jacob) and an introduction by Merry Foresta. (Cover shot at right, via Amazon.)

Comments/Context: I think it is actually fairly common practice that after an artist/photographer dies, the estate is often quickly picked over in search of the remaining images that might be saleable to collectors, museums and the like. Once this cream has been skimmed off, it is often the case that hundreds if not thousands of less recognizable images remain, gathering dust in boxes, until the next person comes along who wants to dig through the archive with a fresh set of eyes.

This book is an excellent example of what can be rediscovered when someone applies some hard work, scholarship, and editing to a large body of “left over” images. The works in this volume were drawn from the Man Ray Trust and have been thoughtfully grouped and sequenced by subject matter. As the title indicates, there are not only Trees, Flowers, Insects and Animals, but also Landscapes, Landmarks, Churches, Castles, Bridges, Boats, Waterways, Waterworks, Hats, Masks, and Automobiles.

There are virtually no “greatest hits” in this book, although there are a few variant images of works that might be easily recognized. What is collected here is a broader collection of often unspectacular photographs that formed the raw material of his approach to art making. What emerges is an eclectic bunch of experiments and snapshots, ideas that were explored and then ultimately reworked or discarded, outtakes and documents of places visited and things seen.

While this might sound boring and thoroughly less than surreal or witty, in fact, seeing this selection of works helps to add some much needed depth and context to his better known and iconic images. Dozens of random portraits (including quite a few of people holding their dogs) help to fill in the gaps of how Man Ray was able to create so many memorable images of people in his career; he was constantly experimenting with poses, looks, and props, many of which didn’t quite work, but obviously became the fodder for next shot down the line. There are lots of experiments with light and shadow in all forms, mixed with straightforward images of natural history specimens (butterflies and bugs, feathers and seahorses); both tell the story of an artist interested in underlying form and shape – it doesn’t take much to see the connections to his Rayographs.

While many of the images here are entirely forgettable, after looking through the entire thick volume, I certainly felt like I had a better grasp of Man Ray’s eye, and how he approached the making of his art. In many ways, I wish that many more master photographers would get this kind of archival exploration, as I think there is much to be learned from sifting through what has been overlooked. In any event, this book gets better with age; at first glance, its subtleties may be missed, but dig a little deeper and look a little closer, and the complexities and contradictions of Man Ray start to emerge.

Collector’s POV: I have been unable to locate the official gallery representative of the Man Ray estate/trust. His photographs are however consistently available in the secondary markets. His most recognizable works (vintage Rayographs and iconic images like Noir et Blanche) are routinely priced between $100000 and $450000. Lesser known works and later prints can be as inexpensive as $3000-5000, with most of his better known work ranging between $10000 and $40000.

For our particular collection, many of the excellent floral still lifes in this book would fit perfectly into our existing genre. We already own one Man Ray flower (here, and illustrated on page 59 of the book), but could certainly imagine adding others (including the terrific cover image) if we could actually ever find them.

Transit Hub:

  • Book review: Independent (here)
  • Alias Man Ray: The Art of Reinvention @Jewish Museum (DLK COLLECTION review here)

2009 Photography Auction Summary

With the 2009 auction season now completely closed up, it is now the time to go back and slice and dice the numbers a bit to see if we can derive some insights about the recent market for photography.

As regular readers know, we write preview and results post for most of the major photography auctions around the world, and also do preview and results posts for contemporary art and other auctions that contain a meaningful amount of photography. Additionally, we report on photobook auctions, and sales that offer both photographs and photobooks. Last year, we covered 67 different sales, from 14 different auction houses.

A couple of quick caveats. The auctions we have covered have taken place in Dollars, Euros and Pounds; for the purposes of these calculations and to smooth out the data a bit, we have converted everything into Dollars (where 1 Euro = 1.43 Dollars and 1 Pound = 1.59 Dollars). Also, it is clear that photographs and photobooks were offered for sale in many more auctions than we have covered here, perhaps in smaller houses, or in secondary and tertiary markets. As such, I think this data likely captures 85-90% or more of the actual sales, but certainly not everything.

Across the photography auction market for the entire year, the total sale proceeds taken together were $74,612,997. If we take as a hypothesis that the auction market is roughly half of the entire photography market (the rest is in galleries and elsewhere), then the size of the market in 2009 was approximately $150M. In the past, I have often heard the number $200M thrown around as the size of the entire photography market, so given the economic downturn, $150M doesn’t sound too far from the likely reality. In contrast to the massive contemporary art market, the total photography market is indeed still quite small.

Here’s how the sale proceeds for photography were divided up by auction house in the past year:

Sotheby’s: $25,428,318
Christie’s: $21,231,561
Phillips De Pury: $15,957,910
Swann: $4,061,690
Bonhams: $1,326,872
Villa Grisebach: $1,283,385
Lempertz: $989,540
Bloomsbury: $981,542
Galerie Bassenge: $880,234
Van Ham: $781,558
Millon: $742,298
Yann Le Mouel: $513,330
Heritage: $434,795

There was also one sale at Argenteuil (the Cami and Sasha Stone atelier), but I have not included this data, as I didn’t ever locate lot by lot results. (For those of you who like to do quick math, take roughly 20% of the numbers above, and you’ll get the approximate amount of total premium that the houses earned as fees.)

These dollar figures can then be turned into dollar-based market share numbers, tabulating the percentage of the photography proceeds in the market which fell to each house. I have added the actual number of individual sales that took place in parentheses as background. (As an aside, it would be fascinating to do this same exercise for the retail galleries to see where the share of market really resides; this is of course impossible to do, as the data isn’t readily available, but an individual gallery could conceivably tabulate its own share by taking its top line photography revenues as a percentage of something like $75M.)

Sotheby’s (12): 34.08%
Christie’s (17): 28.46%
Phillips De Pury (14): 21.39%
Swann (4): 5.44%
Bonhams (2): 1.78%
Villa Grisebach (2): 1.72%
Lempertz (2): 1.33%
Bloomsbury (4): 1.32%
Galerie Bassenge (2): 1.18%
Van Ham (2): 1.05%
Millon (1): 0.99%
Yann Le Mouel (2): 0.69%
Heritage (2): 0.58%

So 83.92% of the photography market in 2009 was held by the top three houses (Sotheby’s, Christie’s, and Phillips De Pury), with Swann the only other house to capture more than 2.00% of the market.

There were a total of 10,530 photography lots on offer this year across the market. (The Top 10 photography lots of the year can be found here.) 6,173 of these sold, while 4,347 failed to sell, making the industry-wide buy-in rate 41.28%. The data below is the house by house overall buy-in rate, compiled from all the sales at that house. It is interesting to match each house up or down against the overall industry benchmark; it was tough year for many. (Millon and Argenteuil have been omitted, as there was only one set of sales data for each house.) I have added the total number of lots on offer for each house in parentheses as background.

Christie’s (1495): 28.29%
Bonhams (317): 31.86%
Swann (1278): 31.92%
Villa Grisebach (380): 33.42%
Phillips De Pury (1619): 36.75%
Sotheby’s (1100): 38.00%
Galerie Bassenge (906): 41.28%
Heritage (480): 42.50%
Lempertz (556): 55.22%
Yann Le Mouel (605): 59.83%
Van Ham (663): 60.33%
Bloomsbury (845): 64.62%

Another intriguing statistic is the $ per lot sold. One might call this an average selling price, for those lots that actually sold. (This would be fun to tabulate for retail galleries as well.)

Sotheby’s: $37,285
Christie’s: $19,806
Phillips De Pury: $15,584
Bonhams: $6,143
Villa Grisebach: $5,073
Swann: $4,723
Lempertz: $3,974
Millon: $3,639
Bloomsbury: $3,283
Van Ham: $2,972
Yann Le Mouel: $2,112
Galerie Bassenge: $1,655
Heritage: $1,575

While most of the major auctions houses provide both a low and high estimate for each lot, not all houses do, so it is impossible to tabulate industry-wide data for estimates. For those houses that do provide both a low and a high estimate, only Sotheby’s and Christie’s were able to bring in total proceeds (across all sales) higher than the total of the low estimates. All other houses failed to cover the low on an aggregate basis. The data for the two who did accomplish this feat:

Sotheby’s:
Total Low Estimate: $23,711,484
Total Proceeds: $25,428,318

Christie’s:
Total Low Estimate: $20,887,757
Total Proceeds: $21,231,561

Overall, I’d say that the weaker economic environment helped the bigger players stay dominant (even if their total revenues shrunk considerably) and exposed the weaknesses of the challengers a bit more; in a “flight to quality” world, the lower end competitors (especially those without deep, established client lists) got squeezed. With some glimmers of optimism on the horizon, perhaps 2010 will be a growth/rebound year for all.

As always, comments, clarifications and critiques are welcome.

Top 10 Photography Lots at Auction in 2009

According to our statistics on 67 different auctions across the globe in 2009 (covering both focused photography sales and the photography buried in contemporary art and other compilation sales), these were the top 10 photography lots in terms of overall selling price last year. No works crossed the $1 million dollar mark in public secondary market transactions. Some might argue that Gilbert & George, John Baldessari, and Felix Gonzalez-Torres do not fall under the label of “photography”; they have been included in the list as the works detailed here are all made up of photographic prints. Prices all include the buyer’s premium and have been converted to dollars/rounded to the nearest dollar where appropriate (1 Euro = 1.43 Dollars; 1 Pound = 1.59 Dollars).

1.) $902500: Gilbert & George, The Moon, 1978, Lot 45, Sotheby’s New York, May 12 (image below, via Sotheby’s)

2.) $822428: Andreas Gursky, Monaco, 2006, Lot 12, Sotheby’s London, February 5

3.) $775000: Edward Curtis, The North American Indian, Portfolios 1-20 and Text Volumes 1-20, 1907-1930, Lot 719, Christie’s New York, October 8 (This lot sold immediately after the auction, but was included as part of the post auction press release by Christie’s, so we include it here, even though it technically did not sell during the auction itself.)

4.) $770500: Jeff Wall, Sunken Area, 1996, Lot 10, Sotheby’s New York, May 12

5.) $707948: Andreas Gursky, Dubai World II, 2007, Lot 10, Sotheby’s London, June 25

6.) $635993: Eugene Atget, Femme, 1925, Lot 15, Sotheby’s Paris, November 20

7.) $554500: John Baldessari, Two Compositions (Dynamic/Static; Red/Green), 1990, Lot 303, Sotheby’s New York, November 12

8.) $542500: Felix Gonzalez-Torres, Untitled, 1994, Lot 6, Phillips De Pury New York, November 12

8.) $542500: John Baldessari, Life’s Balance, 1986, Lot 40, Sotheby’s New York, November 11

10.) $517148: Richard Prince, Untitled (four women with hats), 1980, Lot 23, Phillips De Pury London, February 12

It is altogether possible (though not likely) that a photograph could have sold outside our coverage area, in a smaller house or in a secondary market location, but could still have reached the top 10 in terms of price, so please, if we’ve missed something somewhere, please add it in the comments.

A Contrarian View: A Collector’s Thoughts on Photobooks

For the past month or so, there has been a far reaching discussion on the future of the photobook going on at RESOLVE/Livebooks (here), with dozens of interested parties (photographers, publishers, critics/writers, curators etc.) contributing their ideas. After reading quite a few of the posts, it became clear that the voice of the photography collector has been generally absent from this otherwise broad and thoughtful conversation. For the most part, the discussion to date has been mostly artist and publisher centric (supply), with a primary focus on how changes in technology (digitization and websites, low cost print-on-demand, etc.) might impact the ability of artists/publishers to make/sell amazing books or use new replacements to achieve some of the same end goals. The view from the other end of the pipe (demand) has been covered with somewhat less detail. So it is from the position of collector (and active user of photobooks) that I pass along a few disconnected thoughts:

1.) The primary reasons to buy a photobook for a photography collector are two-fold: reference and education.

I have yet to meet a large and serious photography collector who doesn’t also have a deep library of photobooks (numbering in at least hundreds if not thousands of books). These books are constantly being purchased and carefully read/reviewed as a method of increasing the volume of “seeing” that we do. This is a completely separate activity from “collecting” photobooks (rare or otherwise) – we are not searching for mylar covered signed first editions that will increase in value in and of themselves as objects; we are actively engaging with the content of the photobooks as the background work required to make educated collecting choices. Books in our library (old and new, monographs, exhibition catalogues, greatest hits collections, museum inventories, catalogues raisonne etc.) are not languishing on a coffee table gathering dust; on the contrary, they are constantly being reread, dog-eared, reconsidered and marked with paper slips as we look at new work, as new connections and contexts arise. We hardly ever buy a photograph without first tracking down a monograph (or exhibition catalogue) of the photographer’s work and then spending time looking over the entire project/output; our goal is to winnow down all the available images into a short list of pictures we find most exciting (or not), having spent the effort to actively look at them all. From there, we can then enter the marketplace (at a gallery or at auction) with a much sounder understanding of the work, hopefully making a confident beeline for just those images we have fallen in love with. We also buy books from all kinds of genres and photographers that don’t fit into our particular collecting tastes, as further reference on the trends and important figures in the medium and to keep current on what’s fresh. In short, books are for us the primary vehicle (beyond going to see photography in person) for our photo education.

2.) The purpose of the photobook is the photographs. Period.

We buy books so we can reference the pictures, now and in the future. Detailed image lists and specs are always welcome. If there are well-written, helpful essays (written by the photographers themselves, scholars, or whomever) that provide some understandable back story to the work that will increase our appreciation of what is contained in the images, so much the better. (The indecipherable, artspeak essay is a tragic waste of space.) Of course, we thoroughly enjoy lush paper, superlative reproductions, elegant design, thoughtful sequencing and the like; but top quality production values won’t increase our appreciation of bad photographs. Conversely, great images will make up for lots of deficiencies of publishing, at least for our purposes. Some of the photobooks we come back to again and again have small images or even thumbnails, but this obvious weakness is made up for with additional completeness or increased depth (more work shown). Old photobooks still have plenty of resonance, even if the printing technology or design aesthetic in use at the time wasn’t as effective.

3.) Multiple viewpoints make for a richer discussion.

Once the blocking and tackling of initial immersion in a photographer’s work has been done, the nuanced contrasts of multiple books become important in solidifying our education. The balance point to consider is author control.

A monograph published by or with the cooperation of the photographer is a document to how the artist wants to display the work; the control lies in the hands of the photographer (with the assent and collaboration of the publisher) to present the work as he or she sees fit. As a collector, this vantage point is highly useful to understand: which pictures were selected and sequenced in what order, what size was thought to be the best size, what was left in or taken out etc. Nearly all photobooks about early career artists and photographers come from the artist’s point of view; as artists move along in their careers, more books of this type are published on a project by project basis.

Third party photo books (monographs, exhibition catalogues, group/thematic collections, etc.) put the control in the hands of a scholar or curator, who makes all the display decisions through a slightly different lens. These books provide a collector with a more distanced or distilled view of the work; it’s less raw and more processed, but often provides more historical context or analysis. As photographers progress in their career, more of these kinds of books are produced.

As collectors, we really need (and want) both sets of “eyes” in our library; this gives us a better chance of developing a more nuanced understanding of the work at hand. Our desired outcome is to have more of both, with a weight towards more in-depth scholarship (as it is less broadly available at this point).

4.) For photography collectors, innovation in photobooks isn’t a huge issue.

One part of the thread of this discussion has centered on innovation in photobook publishing or the lack thereof. As a consumer of photobooks, I’m sorry to say that innovation in book design isn’t generally what I’m looking for; I’m nearly entirely focused on the quality of the photography. If the pictures are great, it is my hope that at a minimum, the rest of the package will be good enough not to distract me too much from the images.

Of course, there are the 5% of the books that are so meticulously conceived that the photographs, essays, design, paper, slipcover, etc have all been carefully orchestrated together into a real art object, a collaborative effect that is greater than the sum of its parts. This is truly sublime and wonderful when this occurs, and the impact of the photographs is meaningfully enhanced. No matter what happens in the electronic world in the future, there will always be room for this kind of creative effort (with a small but enthusiastic audience of potential buyers ready and waiting). With costs of self-publishing coming down, creativity will likely be unleashed in ways we can’t yet imagine. That said, I don’t need a library full of these kinds of (often expensive) books – a few treasures from our very favorite photographers here and there will suffice. Perhaps a different way to think of this is that the super special limited edition print run of 500 with an accordion fold and fancy slip case isn’t likely aimed at collectors like us (it’s likely aimed at “photobook as object” collectors, a smaller group of photography/art collectors who have a special interest in the specific artist/project, and potentially other fellow artists); we’re actually in most cases much happier with the run of 3000 that does a high quality job of showing us the work with a minimum of fanfare.

5.) We are likely the last generation of collectors who will rely so heavily on the physical photobook for our photography education.

We are in our 40s, and began our collecting a decade or so ago. So while the Internet has certainly become an integral part of our lives during that time, our collecting has been largely rooted in the traditions of the pre-digital age. We have thus been trained to love the tactile quality of a great book page, and to venerate it above the fleeting image on a computer screen. Even if we are not photo book fetishists, we’re still among the paper based Luddites. This will be impossible to change for us, even if artist websites and online archives/databases become orders of magnitude more compelling, pervasive and useful.

I’m not as certain however about how future collectors who are now in their 20s (or younger) will see photobooks, if their electronic equivalents are ratcheted up in overall quality. Social networking has already begun to transform how we communicate to each other about the art we find of interest. If I was in college today, would I go out and plunk down $100 bucks for a thick, beautiful monograph (much less a lavishly produced artist’s book) if I could see the hi-res images anytime, anywhere on the artist’s website? Wouldn’t I just get my education as a straight feed from the net, bringing in a multitude of voices from the artist, to curators, to the chaos of the blogosphere?

While I have no concrete predictions for the future, I think this brings us back to the underlying question at the core of this whole conversation: what is the purpose of the physical photobook going forward and who is the target audience? An interesting thought to consider is that maybe the photobook will evolve (or some might say return) to having no defined consumer at all, beyond those in small specialized niches/long tails – maybe it will be made by the photographer/curator in a DIY (or self funded) manner solely because the effort of making the physical book is an important part of the overall artistic/scholarly process or is the best venue for the work itself. For us as collectors, the photobook is and always will be a required reference resource; for those of the future who have been weaned on bits, it may be a “nice to have” or an artistic talisman.

Auction Results: Photographic Literature & Fine Photographs, December 8, 2009 @Swann

For those of you who are consistently bored by reports on the auction market for photography, the good news is that this is the last of the auction results posts left over from December; all that remains is the massive, 2009 auction wrap up coming later this week (which will have nuggets of interest for collectors and non-collectors alike), and then we’ll be silent on auctions for a few weeks until the catalogues begin to show up again.

The recent Swann sale was really a combination sale of photographic books and photographs. Results-wise, the photo books performed better, with a respectable buy-in rate (just under 25%) and total sale proceeds on the book lots nearly matching their total low estimate. The photographs were a bit weaker, with a higher buy-in rate (over 38%) and total sale proceeds on the photographs that missed the total low estimate by a decent gap. In both sales, the percentage of lots that sold below their estimate range was unexpectedly high; of course it is likely better to sell for something rather than not sell at all, but to have so many lots sell under the range is certainly a bit discouraging.

The summary statistics across the two portions of the sale are below (all results include the buyer’s premium):

Total of Both

Total Lots: 423
Pre Sale Low Total Estimate: $1276750
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: $1810850
Total Lots Sold: 279
Total Lots Bought In: 134
Buy In %: 31.68%
Total Sale Proceeds: $1128194

Photographic Literature Only

Total Lots: 210
Pre Sale Low Total Estimate: $198800
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: $290700
Total Lots Sold: 148
Total Lots Bought In: 52
Buy In %: 24.76%
Total Sale Proceeds: $194634

Fine Photographs Only

Total Lots: 213
Pre Sale Low Total Estimate: $1077950
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: $1520150
Total Lots Sold: 131
Total Lots Bought In: 82
Buy In %: 38.50%
Total Sale Proceeds: $933560

Here is the breakdown, separated into two sections (using the Low, Mid, and High definitions from the preview post, here):

Photographic Literature Only

Low Total Lots: 210
Low Sold: 148
Low Bought In: 52
Buy In %: 24.76%
Total Low Estimate: $290700
Total Low Sold: $194634

Mid Total Lots: 0
Mid Sold: NA
Mid Bought In: NA
Buy In %: NA
Total Mid Estimate: $0
Total Mid Sold: NA

High Total Lots: 0
High Sold: NA
High Bought In: NA
Buy In %: NA
Total High Estimate: $0
Total High Sold: NA

The top lot by High estimate in the book section was lot 2 Francis Frith, Egypt Nubia and Ethiopia, Illustrated with One Hundred Stereoscopic Photographs, 1862, at $7000-10000; it was also the top outcome in the book section of the sale at $10200.

Only 63.51% of the lots that sold had proceeds in or above the estimate range in this portion of the sale. There were a total of four surprises in this section (defined as having proceeds of at least double the high estimate):

Lot 4, Henry Peach Robinson, Pictorial Effect in Photography, 1869, at $840
Lot 30, Erich Mendelsohn, Russland Europa Amerika, 1929, at $1680
Lot 36, Andre Kertesz, Day of Paris, 1945, at $2040
Lot 72, Andre Kertesz, Select group of 9 titles, various dates, at $1440

Fine Photographs Only

Low Total Lots: 202
Low Sold: 124
Low Bought In: 78
Buy In %: 38.61%
Total Low Estimate: $835150
Total Low Sold: $449960

Mid Total Lots: 9
Mid Sold: 6
Mid Bought In: 3
Buy In %: 33.33%
Total Mid Estimate: $175000
Total Mid Sold: $123600

High Total Lots: 2
High Sold: 1
High Bought In: 1
Buy In %: 50.00%
Total High Estimate: $510000
Total High Sold: $360000

The top lot by High estimate in the photographs section was lot 350 Ansel Adams, Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico, 1941/1948, at $350000-450000; it was also the top outcome in this section of the sale at $360000.

Only 57.25% of the lots that sold had proceeds in or above the estimate range. There were a total of six surprises in this section (defined as having proceeds of at least double the high estimate):

Lot 221, (Medical), Portrait of Susan Grisham, 1865, at $780
Lot 251, Lewis Hine, Oyster Shuckers, Port Royal, South Carolina, 1908, at $9600
Lot 301, Edward Weston/Cole Weston, Shell, 1931/1970s, at $15600
Lot 308, Walker Evans, Select group of 36 photographs, 1929-1971/1971-1979, at $19200
Lot 380, (John F. Kennedy), Group of 17 photographs, 1963, $2640
Lot 401, Carlo Mollino, #109, Female Figure in Studio, 1971, at $3120

Complete lot by lot results can be found here.

Swann Galleries
104 East 25th Street
New York, NY 10010

Auction Results: Photographie, December 9, 2009 @Van Ham

Albert RengerPatzsch was the star of the Van Ham photography sale in Cologne, with four unexpectedly big lots bringing in about a third of the total sale proceeds. Otherwise, the results were more than a little choppy, with a buy-in rate over 55%. (Van Ham does not provide an estimate range in most cases, just a single estimate number, so this figure is used as the High estimate in our calculations).

The summary statistics are below (all results include the buyer’s premium):

Total Lots: 287
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: 395670€
Total Lots Sold: 125
Total Lots Bought In: 162
Buy In %: 56.45%
Total Sale Proceeds: 321413€

Here is the breakdown (using the Low, Mid, and High definitions from the preview post, here):

Low Total Lots: 284
Low Sold: 124
Low Bought In: 160
Buy In %: 56.34%
Total Low Estimate: 365670€
Total Low Sold: 285163€

Mid Total Lots: 3
Mid Sold: 1
Mid Bought In: 2
Buy In %: 66.67%
Total Mid Estimate: 30000€
Total Mid Sold: 36250€

High Total Lots: 0
High Sold: NA
High Bought In: NA
Buy In %: NA
Total High Estimate: 0€
Total High Sold: NA

The top lot by High estimate was lot 1092, Albert RengerPatzsch, Das Bäumchen, 1929, at 10000-12000€; it sold for 36250€. The top outcome of the sale was lot 1093, Albert RengerPatzsch, Buchenwald im November, 1936, at 40000€.

An amazing 75.20% of the lots that sold had proceeds above the estimate. There were a total of 18 surprises in this sale (defined as having proceeds of at least double the high estimate):

Lot 1016, Chargesheimer, Akt, 1960, at 2250€
Lot 1017, Chargesheimer, Akt, 1960, at 2000€
Lot 1018, Paul Citroen, Ruth Landshoff und Manne, 1929, at 3500€
Lot 1084, Alphonse Mucha, Settings & Models, 1895-1919/1975, at 4250€
Lot 1090, Albert RengerPatzsch, Kopfweiden (Niederrhein), 1920, at 15000€
Lot 1091, Albert RengerPatzsch, Sommerlandschaft (Bayern), 1923, at 27500€
Lot 1092, Albert RengerPatzsch, Das Baumchen, 1929, at 36250€
Lot 1093, Albert RengerPatzsch, Buchenwald im November, 1936, at 40000€
Lot 1100, Albert RengerPatzsch, Rotbuchenwald im Herbst, 1943, at 3750€
Lot 1156, Bernd und Hilla Becher, Vergleiche technischer Konstruktionen, 1971, at 563€
Lot 1181, Dusseldorf, Schau kunstlerischer Photographien, 1926, at 875€
Lot 1208, Erich Kukies, Sakrileg, 2007, at 1875€
Lot 1211, Adolf Lazi, IRA, 1931, at 1063€
Lot 1222, Carlo Naya, Ansichten von Venedig, 1870, at 813€
Lot 1225, Helmut Newton, Helmut Newton’s Illustrated, No1-4, 1987-1995, at 438€
Lot 1250, August Sander, Madchen im Zirkuswagen, 1926-1932, at 1063€
Lot 1258, Hugo Schmolz, Treppenhaus, 1938, at 1375€
Lot 1281, US Navy, Rising column of water enters the first phase of characteristic mushroom, 1946, at 1125€

Complete lot by lot results can be found here.

Van Ham Kunstauktionen
Schönhauser Straße 10 – 16
D – 50968 Köln

Auction Results: New York New York, December 12, 2009 @Phillips

The photography lots included in the various themed sales at Phillips (begun as a replacement for the original Saturday sales last fall) have fallen into a kind of pattern: regardless of the thematic subject or the actual number of photo lots on offer, the buy-in rates have been generally higher than normal and the Total Sale Proceeds (for the photography alone) have tended to come in at around half a million dollars. The photography in this auction was right in this same zone, with a slightly better buy-in rate than previous installments. With 14 of these themed sales apparently scheduled for 2010 (in London and New York), if Phillips can keep up a similar pace, the overall photography proceeds for the house will increase significantly.

The summary statistics are below (all results include the buyer’s premium):

Total Lots: 134
Pre Sale Low Total Estimate: $629400
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: $907300
Total Lots Sold: 86
Total Lots Bought In: 48
Buy In %: 35.92%
Total Sale Proceeds: $518876

Here is the breakdown (using the Low, Mid, and High definitions from the preview post, here):

Low Total Lots: 117
Low Sold: 77
Low Bought In: 40
Buy In %: 34.19%
Total Low Estimate: $455300
Total Low Sold: $280751

Mid Total Lots: 15
Mid Sold: 7
Mid Bought In: 8
Buy In %: 53.33%
Total Mid Estimate: $322000
Total Mid Sold: $141875

High Total Lots: 2
High Sold: 2
High Bought In: 0
Buy In %: 0.00%
Total High Estimate: $130000
Total High Sold: $96250

The top lot by High estimate was lot 148, Edward Steichen, The Maypole, Empire State Building, 1932/1960 at $50000-70000; it was also the top outcome of the sale at $56250.

90.70% of the lots that sold had proceeds in or above the estimate range. There were a total of five surprises in this sale (defined as having proceeds of at least double the high estimate):

Lot 39, Dennis Hopper, Out of the 60s from the Geldzahler Portfolio, 1998, at $1625
Lot 121, Walker Evans, New York Subway Portrait, 1940/1960, at $7500
Lot 126, Dennis Stock, James Dean in Times Square, New York City, 1955/Later, at $6000
Lot 131, Larry Clark, Untitled from 42nd Street Boys, 1980, at $3250
Lot 159, Anatoly Pronin, Evening, Manhattan skyline, New York, USA, 1982, at $2000

Complete lot by lot results can be found here.

Phillips De Pury & Company
450 West 15th Street
New York, NY 10011

Auction Results: Photography and Contemporary Art, December 4 and 5, 2009 @Lempertz

A few more auction results posts today to continue the end of year catch-up. The results from the pair of sales in December at Kunsthaus Lempertz in Cologne (one photography and one contemporary art including photographs) were an improvement over the results from the sales from the previous summer in terms of total proceeds, but were still uneven: the buy-in rate topped 50% and the Total Sale Proceeds missed the Total High Estimate by a meaningful margin (Lempertz does not provide an estimate range in most cases, just a single estimate number, so this figure is used as the High estimate in our calculations).

The summary statistics are below (all results include the buyer’s premium):

Total Lots: 318
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: 633100€
Total Lots Sold: 150
Total Lots Bought In: 168
Buy In %: 52.83%
Total Sale Proceeds: 381282€

Here is the breakdown (using the Low, Mid, and High definitions from the preview post, here):

Low Total Lots: 307
Low Sold: 140
Low Bought In: 167
Buy In %: 54.40%
Total Low Estimate: 482100€
Total Low Sold: 264642€

Mid Total Lots: 11
Mid Sold: 10
Mid Bought In: 1
Buy In %: 9.09%
Total Mid Estimate: 151000€
Total Mid Sold: 116640€

High Total Lots: 0
High Sold: NA
High Bought In: NA
Buy In %: NA
Total High Estimate: 0€
Total High Sold: NA

The top lot by High estimate was lot 321, Bernd und Hilla Becher, Chemische Fabrik Wesseling Bei Koln, 1998, at 15000-20000€; it sold for 15600€. The top outcome of the sale was lot 241, Robert Mapplethorpe, Hyacinth, 1987, at 16800€.

74.67% of the lots that sold had proceeds in or above the estimate. There were a total of 15 surprises in this sale (defined as having proceeds of at least double the high estimate):

Lot 25, Alfred Stieglitz, The Street-Design for a Poster, 1903, at 1800€
Lot 27, Robert Demachy, Speed, 1904, at 1020€
Lot 31, Edward Steichen, Rodin-Le Penseur, 1905, at 1680€
Lot 33, Alfred Stieglitz, Horses, 1904, at 1800€
Lot 37, Edward Steichen, The Little Round Mirror, 1906, 2040€
Lot 45, Alfred Stieglitz, Snapshot-From My Window, New York, 1907, at 1800€
Lot 69, Alfred Stieglitz, The Hand of Man, 1902, at 2640€
Lot 72, Alfred Stieglitz, The Terminal, 1892, at 3840€
Lot 74, Alfred Stieglitz, Spring Showers, New York, 1900, at 3000€
Lot 101, Lichtbildwerkstatt Loheland, Ohne Titel (Maske), 1920, at 840€
Lot 199, Umbo, Selbstportrait mit Leica, 1952, at 5040€
Lot 230, Abe Frajndlich, Ilse Bing, 1986, at 3120€
Lot 271, Gunther Forg, Palazzo Della Civilta, Weltausstellung, Rom, 1996, at 1320€
Lot 280, Andreas Gursky, Cheops, 2005, at 2400€
Lot 686, Christopher Williams, Iraq, 1990, at 6000€

Complete lot by lot results can be found here.

Kunsthaus Lempertz
Neumarkt 3
D-50667 Koln

Auction Results: Photographs, December 7, 2009 @Christie’s

Christie’s end of year photographs sale in December mopped up a variety of lower end lots and delivered surprisingly satisfactory results given the mixed bag of material: the buy-in rate was near 25% and the Total Sale Proceeds covered the Total Low Estimate. For Christie’s to clear nearly $1 million on a late season sale like this is certainly a sign that the depth and breadth of collector interest is continuing to firm up.

The summary statistics are below (all results include the buyer’s premium):

Total Lots: 190
Pre Sale Low Total Estimate: $947300
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: $1394700
Total Lots Sold: 138
Total Lots Bought In: 52
Buy In %: 27.37%
Total Sale Proceeds: $966751

Here is the breakdown (using the Low, Mid, and High definitions from the preview post, here):

Low Total Lots: 163
Low Sold: 117
Low Bought In: 46
Buy In %: 28.22%
Total Low Estimate: $913700
Total Low Sold: $594251

Mid Total Lots: 26
Mid Sold: 19
Mid Bought In: 7
Buy In %: 26.92%
Total Mid Estimate: $411000
Total Mid Sold: $312500

High Total Lots: 1
High Sold: 1
High Bought In: 0
Buy In %: 0.00%
Total High Estimate: $70000
Total High Sold: $60000

The top lot by High estimate was lot 111, Ansel Adams, Portfolio Four: What Majestic Word, 1963, at $50000-70000; it was also the top outcome of the sale at $60000.

Only 76.09% of the lots that sold had proceeds in or above the estimate range; there were many more lots that sold below the range than in a normal sale, with a few lots without reserves selling for as little as $500. There were a total of five surprises in this sale (defined as having proceeds of at least double the high estimate):

Lot 10, Jacques-Henri Lartigue, Grand Prix de l’A.C.E., Automobile Delage, 1912/Later, at $12500
Lot 38, Leni Riefenstahl, Der Liebestanz, 1980s, at $6000
Lot 53, Hans Bellmer, La Poupee, 1935/1972, at $6875
Lot 77, Frederick Debourg Richards, Angelsea, New Jersey, c1880, at $5250
Lot 136, Alfred Stieglitz, Studies from Camera Work, 1907-1917, at $16250

Complete lot by lot results can be found here.

Christie’s
20 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10020

Auction Results: Photography and Photography Books, December 2, 2009 @Bassenge

Galerie Bassenge followed up the solid auction results at Villa Grisebach with a somewhat softer outcome several days later. With a buy-in rate over 37%, the Total Sale Proceeds came in well under the Total High Estimate (Bassenge does not provide an estimate range, just a single estimate number, so this figure is used as the High estimate in our calculations). That said, the Total Sale Proceeds were approximately 100000€ higher than the results of Bassenge’s various owner photographs sale earlier in the summer, so perhaps some optimism is warranted.

The summary statistics are below (all results include the buyer’s premium):

Total Lots: 448
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: 456130€
Total Lots Sold: 282
Total Lots Bought In: 166
Buy In %: 37.05%
Total Sale Proceeds: 356462€

Here is the breakdown (using the Low, Mid, and High definitions from the preview post, here):

Low Total Lots: 443
Low Sold: 280
Low Bought In: 163
Buy In %: 36.79%
Total Low Estimate: 403130€
Total Low Sold: 326302€

Mid Total Lots: 5
Mid Sold: 2
Mid Bought In: 3
Buy In %: 60.00%
Total Mid Estimate: 53000€
Total Mid Sold: 30160€

High Total Lots: 0
High Sold: NA
High Bought In: NA
Buy In %: NA
Total High Estimate: 0€
Total High Sold: NA

The top lot by High estimate was lot 4095, Carl Ferdinand Stelzner, Portrait of Harro Harring, 1848, at 15000€; it was also the top outcome of the sale at 22040€.

Only 47.87% of the lots that sold had proceeds above the estimate. There were a staggering total of 37 surprises in this sale (defined as having proceeds of at least double the high estimate). For the sake of brevity, the list below only includes the 11 lots that had proceeds above 3000€:

Lot 4005, Leopoldo Alinari, Cathedral and Bapistry in Pisa, 1854, at 7540€
Lot 4006, Leopoldo Alinari, Art reproductions of Raphael frescoes, Siena, 1854, at 5104€
Lot 4020, Ceylon (Skeen & Co), Women and landscapes of Ceylon, 1870s, at 4176€
Lot 4022, China, Panoramic view of Shanghai, 1864, at 7540€
Lot 4025, Sebah and Joaillier, Views of Constantinople, 1880s, at 3248€
Lot 4033, Sylvester Dutton and Vince Michaels, Panoramic view of Canton, 1863, at 12760€
Lot 4131, Aenne Biermann, Self-portrait, 1931, at 11600€
Lot 4133, Ilse Bing, Self portrait with Leica, 1931/1988, at 5104€
Lot 4177, Harold Edgerton, The Turtledove, 1933, at 3248€
Lot 4224, Mangus Hirschfeld, Blocking Berliner Institut fur Sexualwissenschaft, 1933, at 8120€
Lot 4415, Edward Weston, Nautilus Shells, 1947, at 4872€

Complete lot by lot results can be found here.

Galerie Bassenge
Erdener Straße 5a
14193 Berlin

Auction Results: Photographie Ancienne, Moderne et Contemporaine, November 21, 2009 @Yann Le Mouel

With the new year now in full swing, we have a backup of auction results from the end of 2009 to report on in the next few days, ending with a detailed 2009 auction summary later in the week. Yann Le Mouel’s various owner photography sale was scheduled during Paris Photo, but must have gotten lost in all the action. The buy-in rate was over 55% and the Total Sale Proceeds missed the Total Low Estimate by a wide margin.

The summary statistics are below (all results include the buyer’s premium):

Total Lots: 290
Pre Sale Low Total Estimate: 425350€
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: 550550€
Total Lots Sold: 128
Total Lots Bought In: 162
Buy In %: 55.86%
Total Sale Proceeds: 186052€

Here is the breakdown (using the Low, Mid, and High definitions from the preview post, here):

Low Total Lots: 282
Low Sold: 128
Low Bought In: 154
Buy In %: 54.61%
Total Low Estimate: 450550€
Total Low Sold: 186052€

Mid Total Lots: 8
Mid Sold: 0
Mid Bought In: 8
Buy In %: 100.00%
Total Mid Estimate: 100000€
Total Mid Sold: 0€

High Total Lots: 0
High Sold: NA
High Bought In: NA
Buy In %: NA
Total High Estimate: 0€
Total High Sold: NA

The top lot by High estimate was lot 29, Eugene Cuvelier, Chêne et sous-bois, 1862, at 15000-18000€; it did not sell. The top outcome of the sale was lot 158, Aaron Siskind, New York, South Street, 1947, at 6420€.

92.97% of the lots that sold had proceeds in or above the estimate range. There were a total of five surprises in this sale (defined as having proceeds of at least double the high estimate):

Lot 4, Kusakabe Kimbei, Geisha se levant les cheveux, 1880, at 934€
Lot 48, Andre Kertesz, Chez Mondrian, 1926/1984, at 3151€
Lot 108, Nicolas Yantchevsky, Pont levant de la rue de Crimee, vu du Quai de L’Oise, 1954, at 1868€
Lot 216, Eikoh Hosoe, Homme et femme, 1960, at 1459€
Lot 253, David Bailey, John Lennon et Paul McCartney, 1965, at 6303€

Complete lot by lot results can be found here.

Yann Le Mouel
22, Rue Chauchat
75009 Paris

Sign up for our weekly email newsletter

This field is required.