Buying art as an investment

Posted by: Bruce Woodhouse on 16 August 2007

We are considering buying a picture that we have looked at several times over a number of years and which the gallery is now offerring us for sale at a price that is within reach.

We want to buy the picture because we love it, because it will give us pleasure hopefully for many years; we are not buying it as an investment. However my question is this, is there any way of telling how a picture may accrue value over time? The artist (Derrick Greaves) is a fairly well known name, he is still alive, his work appears in collections in various places. The price of the picture has risen since we first viewed it. Is any of this of any help in predicting its future value or is it basically just one of those things.

Like I said the value of the picture to us will be in the owning but I'm curious as to wether our descendants (or the Skipton Cats Refuge) will benefit from the purchase in the long run!

Bruce
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by Tarquin Maynard - Portly
Bruce

IMO you should buy it because you love it; any rise in value should be looked on as a pleasant bonus.

I had the opportunity to buy some of the original Pauline Baynes illustrations from the Narnia books.( Prince Caspian to be precise ) I did so without hesitation as I love her work.

Regards

Mike
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by Rasher
I love Christopher Corr's pictures and was about to buy a couple of his from the Berkeley Square gallery, but didn't in the end because a couple of days before I was to go I discovered another artist who just bowled me over. I've bought a few of these others since as I just love them, and I think that that is all that has to matter when it comes down to it.

Paintings are not just about the image, they have to absorb the focus of the artist who spent the hours and the inspiration on that single piece of media - all focused on that little square that is now in a frame. A print is just a photograph of it, it isn't that square of white that the artist sellotaped to his/her board and agonised over. It isn't about the "picture" on the canvas, but the image that emerges from within the paint as a reflection of the mind of the artist. A print is nothing but a snapshot, it can't contain the emotion and concentration of the artist. Most importantly for an artist, when the original is sold, the artist loses it forever - it's passed on, never to be held again, and probably not to know where it goes, so the sacrificial element creates another level of emotional attachment to the original that a print can never get close to, a trust that you have to honour. .
If you understand this, then you have to buy the original because you love it, as buying for any monetary considerations is betrayal to the artist's child.
If you love art, you have a duty to ensure that you buy it for the right reasons, because there is only one of it. It was created to be loved.
quote:
We want to buy the picture because we love it


So buy it, and look at it every day, and grow to love it more and more. Your descendants will love it for what it meant to you, not for what it's worth in cash. Trust me.
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by Derek Wright
I agree with the above sentiments - buy it because you like it and that you would probably feel deprived if someone else nipped into the gallery and bought it before you returned.

However a big warning.

Once you have broken your duck and bought a work of art - you will inevitably buy more - you will need wall space - this is based on experience - in 1999 we bought a Jody Forster 20by 16 photo, the following year another, then a couple of years later a Joel Greene oil, then 3 more, then an Ed Mell then a Haddock and a Larry Joseph - all names you probably will not have heard of but we like them.

Your final problem will be is what to do with your collection when you go to the great care home in the sky - will any of your relatives appreciate them, will a local museum/art gallery appreciate them etc.
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by James Fraser
Buy of course, you like the picture, it is as one off as you and I are, you have the real article itself.................I have done so and ended up with more real art work purchased later!!!!!!!!!
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by Bruce Woodhouse
All your enthusiasm is infectious. We already own some original art although none quite like this planned purchase. My wife is also an artist of some skill.

I'm just curious about the investment issue really-if we buy it we sure won't be selling it in my lifetime. I should also point out that as a modern abstract it will be detested by all of the descendants currently listed as benefactors of my will. We have rather different tastes.

Bruce
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by gone
If you love the picture, buy it! It's your personal value judgement, and if you buy pictures just for investment, especially from living artists, don't expect returns any time soon, unless you get lucky.
I have the habit of falling in love with paintings, which has proved expensive, but given me so much pleasure over the years. I have no idea if I will ever get my money back, but I don't care.
An advantage of buying from living artists is that you often get to know them personally, and that adds an extra dimension to your enjoyment
Cheers
John
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by JamieWednesday
But it and change the beneficiary in your will. I'll have it..!

You can even throw in the kitchen sink if you like..(boom boom)
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by Derek Wright
Only look at art buying as an investment if you are buying very well known names or when you are young and the artist may achieve collectability status before you get too old and /or you are lucky enough to buy just before the artist becomes very collectible.

You have to write down the cost by at least half to allow the buying gallery make enough to sell the painting on.

I have seen a specific work of art in a gallery for at least 3 years - it was consigned there by the owner's estate and is priced very similarly to a more recent work by the same artist. The gallery will take their percentage leaving the estate a much lesser amount, also allowing for the loss of interest on the original cost price and the original owner is definitely out of pocket - however they will have enjoyed the work.

Supposing the work did appreciate in price dramatically would you sell it? (unless you are funding the care home before the one in the sky).
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by Bruce Woodhouse
Nice one Jamie. Winker

This reminds my of my favourite ever thread in the forum. Does anyone else remember the great variety and fun of the 'Pick one piece of Art for your Desert Island' thread?
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by Rockingdoc
I would regard spending on paintings like spending on a holiday, avoid all thought of cost/value once the deed is done.

I also agree with the future wall space issue. We now have our paintings on rotation through the house.

p.s. Had a quick Google, and rather like the look of this Derrick Greaves

p.p.s I have found it surprisingly easy to contact "known" artists with a bit of simple research, and in every case found them more than willing to deal direct. They rarely work exclusively with only one gallery , so there is no "breech of contract". As suggested, gallery mark-up is about 100%, so worth your effort.
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by i am simon 2
Art PricesThe above seems to give access to art auction prices for the painter you mention, but it looks like you may have to pay for the privilege.

Simon
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by SteveGa
Bruce the own art scheme run by the arts council offers interest free loans (up to £2k) for people buying from participating venues. Might be worth checking out.
Steve
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by acad tsunami
quote:
Originally posted by mike lacey:


[QUOTE]I had the opportunity to buy some of the original Pauline Baynes illustrations from the Narnia books.( Prince Caspian to be precise ) I did so without hesitation as I love her work.


Me too. Pauline Baynes is easily my favourite illustrator.
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by ianmacd
quote:
Originally posted by acad tsunami:
Me too. Pauline Baynes is easily my favourite illustrator.


Well good for you.

That's the history of Art rewritten then, as you express to know everything about everything.

But back onto the original topic, I agree with Rasher's ending comment. If you love it, buy it and your descendants (hopefully!) will love it for what it meant to you.

In the meantime, you will get immense pleasure from the piece and find something new in it on every viewing.

Regards

Ian
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by joe90
quote:
is there any way of telling how a picture may accrue value over time?


Arrange for the artist to die in tragic circumstances (say, as an aid worker in Darfur diving into a mob of hungry peasants saving Paris Hilton's dog from them - Paris is of course filming 'Extreme Celebrity Survivor - Darfur').

That should do it.
Posted on: 16 August 2007 by acad tsunami
quote:
Originally posted by ianmacd:
quote:
Originally posted by acad tsunami:
Me too. Pauline Baynes is easily my favourite illustrator.


Well good for you.

That's the history of Art rewritten then, as you express to know everything about everything.



Show any post of mine where I have said as much and I will donate £5,000 to your favourite (registered) charity.
Posted on: 17 August 2007 by Rasher
Oh don't start you two...this is a good thread. Take it outside if you want to fight. Roll Eyes

I resurrected my music room last night after the building work and decorating, with the help of my good buddy Oldie, and we hung my pictures back on the wall. I've missed them. They are my extended family now, and I'm still getting to know them even though I've had them a while now. It's a wonderful thing.
Posted on: 23 August 2007 by Bruce Woodhouse
Well the gallery and artist accepted a slightly cheeky offer and when the courier is spurred into action we will be the very happy owners of the picture. As ever the photo does nothing, not least because the surface is actually almost a collage of paper layers.
Posted on: 29 August 2007 by seagull
Mrs S used to work for a small, privately owned publishing company. It was owned by a very shrewd businessman who had many interests and the means to indulge in them and to enjoy them tax efficiently as well...

He enjoyed French wine - he published books on the subject and obviously had to buy many cases of fine wines for his book launches, though no-one appeared to get bladdered at the launch parties. He also bought a small vineyard in France...

He liked listening to music - he published books on the subject and managed to furnish and equip a room in his large country house with top end (Linn) hi-fi for the book launches.

He liked collecting paintings - he published books on the subject but only about modern artists most of whom were still alive at the time but on their last legs. He also owned a small gallery in the town but rarely sold anything, until the artist died when the value of their paintings increased as there would be no more from that source. (for what it's worth a typical painting he bought would look like a bird's eye view of a snooker table or some badly fried eggs or...)

He said that if you liked something but had to ask the price then you could not afford it.