Shepard Fairey Admits “He Lied” About Obama Poster Image.

Shepard Fairey Admits “He Lied” About Obama Poster Image.

A new twist in the controversial case of Shepard Fairey and the copyright infringement case filed against him by the Associated Press has taken on a new dimension. Fairey admits he lied about which image he used to create the now famous Obama poster. He has also admitted to attempting to conceal the truth by submitting false evidence to the court and his attorney.

“In an attempt to conceal my mistake, I submitted false images and deleted other images,” Mr. Fairey said in a statement, released on his Web site. “I sincerely apologize for my lapse in judgment, and I take full responsibility for my actions, which were mine alone.” Shepard Fairey

Read More Here

Artist Admits Using Other Photo for ‘Hope’ Poster

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/arts/design/18fairey.html?_r=1

Fairey who has been represented by Attorney Anthony Falzone of the Stanford University Fair Use Project is now looking for a new lawyer. Falzone has said it would be effectively impossible to represent a client in this situation. Falzone is withdrawing from the case.

http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/3136

The big disappoint here is that Fairey has taken the stance that he intended to pursue the right of an artist to use an image as a source under the Fair Use and Transformation  factor of copyright law to create a new and unique work of art. Which I believe is a very important issue today given the growth of modern media.

Before you get your back up stop and ask yourself the question, is there anything really new in the world of creating images that does not reference some historical source?

The whole issue is a Can of Worms that Fairey opened under false pretenses when he decided to lie and create false documents. I guess the question is why? Because under the Fair Use rule it would not have made any difference to his case according to his attorney Anthony Falzone. The fact that Fairey lied about which image he used however does change the issue. Now he is not an Artist who used a source image to create a new work of art; he is a, perjure, a liar. That changes the focus of his defense from Fair Use to Perjury.

Shepard Fairey has stepped up now, has taken full responsibility for his actions, and admitted his mistake. As disappointed as I am that he lied I have to give him credit for now telling the truth.

The truth is today it is far more complicated to make images than every before and it is just going to get more complex in the future. Just look at just about any TV commercial and you will see a reference to familiar imagery. The same is true in modern image making. We have all been assaulted with the imagery of the past. Because we are human, we react to the familiar. I think recognizing the fact that we individually do retain an image vocabulary of our own, built upon a history of images of the past; we need to be truthful to our audience and ourselves and give credit to the source, the influence. This may not help you as far as the Law is concerned but it will help you be truthful about your work and your influences and inspiration. It may help you make more honest art.

We only need to look back in time a short way to the DaDa and Pop Art movements to reference the obvious. Warhol’s Campbell Soup Cans or DaDa collages. It is not about the source it is about the truth. We are not even close to figuring out the complexities of modern image making. What we have to decide as artists is, are we going to pursue the question or are we going to allow the courts to decide for us? If you never achieve fame, it is probably not a very important issue, but if you do, it might be. Guess Shepard Fairey found out.

An Important Footnote to the Story and the AP Case

Manny Garcia the Photographer who took the Obama image has filed his own suit against the Associated Press AP. Garcia stated in court documents that AP has never owned the copyright to the image in question. Garcia stated he was hired to photograph George Clooney and that he never assigned the copyrights of the Obama image to AP. Garcia contends he alone owns the copyright to the Obama image, which Fairey used.

Read my original post here:

Copyright Fair Use and the Transformative Factor, by David Eubank

http://davideubank.wordpress.com/2009/02/11/copyright-fair-use-and-the-transformative-factor/

Check it out for Yourself

Resource: Stanford University Library Copyright and Fair Use

CHAPTER 9. Fair Use

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/index.html

B. Measuring Fair Use: The Four Factors

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-b.html#1

Filed under: Art, Art News, Culture Economey, How to survive as a Working Artists, Journalism, Media, News, On Art, Shepard Fairey, Trash, Uncategorized , http://davideubank.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=771#, http://davideubank.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=771&message=1#, Shepard Fairey, Shepard Fairey Associated Press Lawsuit, Shepard Fairey Lied

Buky Schwartz (1932–2009)

Buky Schwartz (1932–2009)

Sculptor and video artist Buky (pronounced “Bookie”) Schwartz died on Wednesday September 2, 2009 He was 77.

I met Buky in 1979 and assisted him with his video installation Color Bars at the Akron Art Institute where I worked as an exhibit builder. I was also an art student at the University of Akron at the time and had limited experience in the visual concepts that Buky so patiently attempted to explain to me as we began the work of building the installation.

He wanted to build a wall in the middle of the gallery floor shaped like a triangle. Then we would plot out lines across the space and paint the video color bar across the gallery floor, walls and over top of the triangle. He told me when we were done that the sculptural space of the installation would appear on the video monitor as the traditional color bars used at the beginning of a video. I understood what the color bars were but still didn’t get how we were going to accomplish the task of compressing the visual space of the gallery that would become a visual burst of color and three dimensional form into a controlled two dimensional square when viewed on the video monitor.

I didn’t have to understand I just needed to build the triangle wall and prepare the gallery for the installation. I was an experience carpenter and exhibit builder I had worked on numerous conceptual installations. John Coplans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Coplans was the Director of the Institute and he liked Conceptual Art and installations. I had worked with artists like Vito Acconci http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vito_Acconci and Robert Morris http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Morris_(artist) and many others on their installations and Buky’s  request was simple and right in line with what I did all the time.

So, I got to work building the triangle wall, two by fours, drywall and mud. With the triangle wall up and the first coat of mud (Plaster or Joint Compound) applied and drying Buky said it was time to start installing the video camera. The process of mounting the video camera seemed to take as long as it did for the mud to dry. After careful positioning of the camera, Buky began taping, not with the camera but with tape. He taped a grid on the TV monitor where the color bars would appear when we were finished with the painting. As he did that, I applied another coat of mud to the wall.  The day was done, I worked late to finish the wall and coated it with primer.

In the morning is when things got interesting maybe even mind blowing. We began to plot out the positions for the painted stripes that would cover the floor and walls of the gallery. Buky working from the monitor directed me to the points in the gallery that would be our references. Wild lines radiating out from a central point running across the triangle and all over the gallery compressed the 3D space into 2D on the TV monitor. Even without the color applied, I could now see what was going to happen. We began painting the stripes of the color bar on the floors and walls. Hours later, a multi-colored square appeared on the TV monitor. After adjusting the light and the camera all the viewer could see on the TV monitor was a color bar. The gallery space though was a dynamic combination of sculptural form and color.

The viewer participated in the installation by walking through the gallery space while viewing himself or herself on the TV monitor. As the viewer walked through the gallery, they would appear to disappear behind the triangle wall and reappear as they walked past the wall. On the TV monitor, it looked like the viewer was walking through the color bars disappearing and reappearing through an invisible triangle shape.

What Buky did was define the three dimensional space by showing the abstraction of two-dimensional perspective that the camera sees and artists try to duplicate when they draw. What was so mind blowing is that the two-dimensional references now existed in real three-dimensional space? The viewer could now interact simultaneously between the two dimensions and see or experience the visual and perceptual abstractions that were taking place. Buky was explaining three-point perspective http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_(graphical) in an interactive setting that was cutting edge and in real time. Buky would have blown Masaccio’s mind. Masaccio the renaissance painter is credited with the invention of scientific perspective or three-dimensional perspective. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masaccio

Color Bars wasn’t the last time I assisted Buky. A year or so later I was President of the Student art League at the University of Akron. The Student Union wanted to fund an art exhibition. They wanted something current and innovative; they wanted something that would rock. I discussed the request with a professor of mine Don Harvey. He suggested I call Buky to see if he would do one of his installations in the Student union. Even though I had developed a good friendship with Buky during our time working together, I thought he would never agree to do an installation. We had no budget to speak of, just expenses and a very modest stipend, hardly worth a major artists time, in fact the money we had was hardly worth anybody’s time. But I called Buky anyway and he immediately said yes. He said he had a piece in mind and would call me with the details later.

Buky called and wanted to know if I could get some logs, I could. I had a little firewood business and had plenty of logs, but he wanted log rounds of different sizes and lengths. I can do that I told him. Buky showed up as planned and I showed up with a truck full of assorted logs. I got to haul all of the logs up to the second floor of the Student Union while Buky surveyed the space. Well that was my job I certainly wasn’t the brains and I was young. If I had, had any brains I would have gotten volunteers from the Student art League to carry all of those logs upstairs and then back down after the exhibit ended.

Buky explained what he was going to do, this time I had an idea of what he was talking about after working on the Color Bars installation.

He arranged the log rounds according to the random shapes and sizes. He explained that he was going to paint random yellow lines across the logs to create a divided rectangle on the TV monitor. A similar installation can be seen in this video narrated by John Hanhardt Whitney Film and Video Curator 1974-1996.

Watch Video Here: http://blog1.videoart.net/?m=200706

During the building of the installation, Buky pestered me to show him slides of my Senior Show. I was intimidated, I felt self-conscious about my work, after all, here was a Master who I respected and admired. What if he said my work was crap what would I do?

So after we finished work on the installation we went over to the school of art. I got my slides. Buky and I went into the art history projection room. I loaded my slides into the projector and reached the moment of truth. I clicked through the slides one by one; Buky was silent and studied each one intently. I thought, he thinks my work sucks but that wasn’t the case. He was genuinely interested in the work and wanted to know why and how I had made the decisions I had made creating the work.

I had built three zig zaging steel walls in the gallery and poured coke slag against the sides of each walls. The slag like little hillsides sloughed down the sides of the walls and spread across the floor. I used the coke slag a by-product of making steel as a natural element in the installation. As the slag sloughed down the sides of the wall, it created a natural path. As would dirt or rock as it sloughs off a hillside or riverbank. However, I had neat paths sweep up between the steel walls, paths where people could walk.

Buky asked me why I had created these neat paths. I told him that the gallery director was concerned that people might trip on the rock like slag, so I made the paths to put the director at ease.

Buky was silent for a moment; I could tell he was thinking about what he would next say. He was very intent and very direct, he said, “Don’t make excuses, make decisions and understand why you make them and take responsibility for those decisions. Never do that again, never let anyone force you to change your mind about your decisions or your art”.

His advice stuck and it was some of the best advice I was ever given. What Buky explained was that I had made what would have been a great artwork just good by allowing the director to influence my decision-making. The decision to create paths instead allowing the material to take its natural form altered my intent my idea my art.

Buky was a sincere friend a friend who will tell you the truth and stand by you he was a true mentor. That was the last time I saw him. He went back to New York and I went to Graduate School. He later returned to Israel and I moved west. I don’t think that Buky ever really received the credit he deserved for his pioneering work in video in America. He was truly a Master and he was a visual genius. Buky broke new uncharted ground in the visual arts with his work. He was a giant among his peers and has earned his place in history and he was a friend, I will miss him even more now that he has passed.

Visit Buky Schwartz website:  http://www.bukyschwartz.com/main.htm

Watch Videos of Buky Schwartz at work:  http://www.videoart.net/home/Artists/ArtistPage.cfm?Artist_ID=1431

Read more about buky’s life:

Video art pioneer passes away at 77 By Ellie Armon Azoulay

Sculptor and video artist Buky Schwartz passed away yesterday. He was 77. Schwartz was born in Jerusalem in 1932, studied at the Avni Institute in Tel Aviv, worked as an assistant to Itzhak Danziger and studied at Saint Martins College of Art in London with Anthony Caro. In 1965, Schwartz was among the founders of the local 10+ Group, along with sculptors Pinhas Eshet, Uri Lifshitz, Ika Braun and other artists, including Raffi Lavie and Ziona Shimshi. In 2007, the Tel Aviv Museum displayed a comprehensive exhibition on the vivacious group, which held scores of shows throughout the course of its activity. More…http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1112390.html

Filed under: Art, Art News, Journalism, Media, News, On Art, Photography, Video Art , Buky Schwartz, Video Art

The Artist and Debt, Annie Leibovitz Images and Nightmares

The Artist and Debt, Annie Leibovitz Images and Nightmares

The Repo-man knocks at the door. “Let me in Let me in”! Not by the hair of my Chinnie Chin Chin is Annie’s reply to Art Capital Group. Today the old wolf at the door nightmare torments one of the most gifted artists in America; Photographer Annie Leibovitz who made a deal with a Company of Wolves with the hope of saving her home, her life’s work and her family.

Annie owes Art Capital Group 24 Million Dollars. To secure her 24 million dollar loan she used her real estate, her art collection and the rights to her artwork as collateral. Why she needed, such a large loan is at the heart of a story in the New York Times written by Allen Salkin about Leibovitz’s struggle with Taxes, Real Estate and Debt Management.

For Annie Leibovitz, a Fuzzy Financial Picture NYTIMES July31, 2009 by Allen Salkin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/02/fashion/02annie.html?_r=1&ref=business

Annie’s struggle with debt was compounded by the recent deaths in the past five years of her long time partner Susan Sontag, the writer and her Father and Mother.  She also has children and recently added two giving birth to twins. At the same time of all of her personal issues, Leibovitz was managing the renovation of her three Greenwich Village properties, which alone was a source of enormous personal stress, controversy and a major financial impact on her personal fortune.

Who is Annie Leibovitz and how did she become a character in a nightmarish bedtime story?  In the beginning of her career Annie was I think simply in the right place at the right time combined with a genius talent to capture life on film. She became the staff Photographer for Rolling Stone Magazine when Rolling Stone was just another hopeful grassroots publication. Annie’s images dominated the cover with inside images of Rock and Rolls Greatest Artists. Her images sold copy and many believe were the catapult for the success for Rolling Stone Magazine. Along with fame came fortune and opportunity. Annie signed with Vanity Fair for a seven-figure salary estimated to be 3 million dollars a year with millions more in expenses for outrageously fantastic photo shoots where she made many of her trademark images. Annie was living the Artists dream of endless opportunity and budget to create her work.

Along the way, though she partied too much and developed a pattern of financial mismanagement. Just because a person is, an artistic genius does not make them good with money or debt management. Leibovitz’s ability to make money through her work offset her inability to manage money and debt until now.

Now is another moment of being in the right place but at the wrong time. Before Annie went to the Art Capital Group, who by the way is best described as a high end Pawnshop for the art worlds, Top Artist’s, Collector’s and Dealer’s, she arranged to sell limited portfolios of her work through the auction house Phillips de Pury. The auction that might have bailed her out fell short of the mark when the Art Bubble Burst in October of 2008. That left Annie in a real bind. She had spent millions on the renovations of her New York property and had to buy out a neighbor because of a lawsuit that added several million dollars to the cost. Then the taxman rang and wanted 1.5 million in taxes. With the economy and the art, market is shambles the wolf offered a deal that Annie gambled would save her.

Learn more about Art Capital Group and how it works.

That Old Master? It’s at the Pawnshop NYTIMES by Allen Salkin

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/24/arts/design/24artloans.html?fta=y

The fact remains that Annie Leibovitz has tremendous earning power and she may yet overcome this nightmare. Her photographic negative archive held by Getty Images is alone estimated to be worth 50 million dollars. That is why Art Capital is so aggressively after the rights to her images.

In fact, Annie still has time to pay them back because full repayment isn’t due until September 8^th, 2009. Never mind that fact Art Capital isn’t waiting they have filed several lawsuits against Leibovitz with the most recent this past week to gain access to her assets now. The prior suit was dismissed in part was to stop Annie from working for Getty Images because Art Capital alleged that it would make it more difficult for them to sell her Archive if she was working for Getty. The court ruled against Art Capital Group.

You may be saying to yourself that this story is outrageous and that Leibovitz is unique, but not so. In fact, in a city like New York where a one-bedroom apartment can cost a million plus she is in the small time real-estate market. When you combine renovation costs in New York City with the cost of property it is easy to spend a lot more money that you bargained for. I am sure that when Annie started this adventure the sky seemed to be the limit in the Art Market until the bust of 2008. Combined with the downfall of the economy and tight lending by banks Art Capital Group was in a great position to reap a profit.

Art Capital Group http://www.artcapitalgroup.com/Questions.html

The real enemy in this story is DEBT! Debt is the ball and chain that has hobbled Annie and it will do the same to you as an Artist. In fact, debt will stop you faster than a speeding bullet from achieving success as an artist.

Many artists are finished before they even get started because of debt. Yes, those student loans will sink you faster than the Titanic. You will find that the nice banker isn’t so nice and will tie you up in knots that you will struggle against for 20 years or more.

Even if you have overcome that obstacle and have achieved success, you still maybe burdened with the debt of a mortgage, car loan, credit cards and studio expenses like rent. All of the debt most American have, and when the economy goes south you still got that debt to pay back.

If this isn’t the reason most artists never make it; it has to be a close second and I don’t know what the first is. One thing I know for sure you as an Artist need to manage your money and debt in the most conservative way possible. Never count your chickens before they hatch. Pay as you go as far as you possibly can. And for god sake live in the Mid-West or Western States and stay off the coasts. New York City may be the Art Hub of the world but visit don’t buy.

You also need to understand contracts and the results of signing contracts not only with lenders but with galleries and dealers. If you don’t understand contracts then find someone who does like a lawyer so you can root out any fine print in the deal before you commit. You also need to use contracts when you are hired to do work or sell work so that your rights and the rights of the buyer or employer are clearly spelled out. What are the terms of ownership and who owns the rights to the image, painting or whatever?

The business of art is complex as is the business of money and they are equally the same. While your vision as an artist may be limited to your creative, genius the business of your art is all about the money and wolves are not endangered in the Art World environment.

Debt is food for the wolf and the wolf is always hungry and eager to make a profit or a meal out of your mistakes. Regardless of how outrageous your creative ideas are, keep your financial ideas conservative. The fact is most of us have to have steady paying jobs of some sort to just enjoy the basics in life, homes, cars, children. If you can limit your debt, you will in the long run enjoy more freedom to create your art.

If your lucky enough to make a lot of money spend wisely and pay cash when you can, never incur debt you absolutely do not have too. I know this isn’t what we have been taught but unless you want to be a slave shed the ball and chain of debt or better yet never let them shackle you to begin with. If you have to make a deal to get what you want be sure to very carefully weigh the all of the possible outcomes, good, bad and ugly. Is the risk worth the possible payoff?

I guess the other side of the story is as artists we all like the live on the edge. Risk seems to feed our creative nature. Somehow, we need to keep the benefits of life on the edge and maintain some control over our financial security. When economic times like today come the balance is tipped and we are, always going to have days like these sooner or later. Therefore, we have to plan for the reality while we are creating the impossible dream.

As for Annie, I am confident she will emerge from this crisis and continue to be successful. Art Capital will continue to find wholesome meals and Annie will earn more money in the next year than most of us will earn in our lifetime even after the wolves feed. She will also earn some profound lessons and they will serve her well as will the lesson of her bedtime story. When the Wolf came a Knocking.

Filed under: Art, Art News, Art Prints, Culture Economey, How to, How to survive as a Working Artists, Investing, Media, News, On Art, Photography, Uncategorized , Annie Leibovitz, Art Business, Art Capital Group, Art Loans, Art Pawnshops, Artists and Debt, Debt, Famous Photographers, Rolling Stone Magazine, Student Loans

A Controversy of Transformation and Shepard Fairey

OBEY I am not a Crook, digital montage by David Eubank

A very well written article by Steven Heller on the Art of Shepard Fairey and the controversy of the transformative factor in art and copyright law.

Long live Dada!

Shepard Fairey is not a Crook, by Steven Heller

!! READ THIS !!

Filed under: Art, Art Marketing, Art News, Art Prints, Culture Economey, Journalism, Media, News, On Art, Painting, Shepard Fairey, Uncategorized , Fairey, Shepard

An Art Adventure, Visiting the Archie Bray, Helena Montana

An Art Adventure, Visiting the Archie Bray

Walking the 26 acres through the ruins of the old brickyard that is home to the Archie Bray Foundation is a surreal experience, like that of Alice as she explored Wonderland.

My Alice on this trip was my youngest daughter Kate. Kate is an Art student at Flathead Valley Community College in Kalispell Montana.

Clay excites her, just ask her about the possibilities of making art with clay and be ready for a long conversation. Kate had just returned home after she cut her spring break trip to Seattle a day short. With a day to spare, I suggested we take a quick day trip down to the Archie Bray to see what was going on. The Archie Bray is located just outside Helena Montana, about a three-hour drive each way from Columbia Falls Montana give or take a few deer crossings on the Swan Highway. If you’re not from Montana, you have to realize a 6 hour round trip is a short drive in a very big state.

Established in 1951 by Brick Maker Archie Bray, “…for all who are sincerely interested in any branches of the ceramic arts, a fine place to work.” Archie Bray, Sr. 1951

Archie Bray Foundation Website: http://www.archiebray.org/

As you enter the grounds, you immediately know you are some place speacial. Spread across the landscape is remains of Artist Residents past and present. Sculptural installations inserted into the ruins of the old brickyard along with discarded pots and ceramic sculpture left behind as former Resident Artists left this special place to make their marks on the art world. Many former Resident Artists, noted in every who’s who list of the modern art world have transformed the modern arts and crafts movement into what it is today. Ideas and the freedom to explore new ideas and methods through the creative process is the magic of the Archie Bray, a rare and unique opportunity in today’s society.

To attempt to explain the presence of place that you as a visitor experience in words, as you explore the grounds, is a poor substitute to recreate the feeling and mood of the Bray. Mysterious marvels hide in every corner high and low.

Venturing into the old Brick kilns is something like entering old forgotten temples of the past. Walls of thick glaze attached to the interiors of the kilns run over the firebrick, with greens and yellows that peer out of the darkness glimmering in the shafts of sunlight beaming in from vent holes above. Mysterious machines and tools litter the grounds often becoming part of art installations.

Fantastic structures rise up out of the landscape and create a surreal experience foreign to the natural landscape.

The ruins of Wonderland stimulate the imagination and the inner child artist in all of us. Make no mistake; in this Wonderland, the future of ceramic art and craft is now being invented and transformed. The New the Next great ideas are taking shape, form and they will become part of the history, and the legacy of the Bray as it has been now for nearly six decades.

As Kate and I explored the Bray, we were having a lot of fun with our own invented scavenger hunt. We were looking for the Tops created by former Bray Artist Richard Swanson. http://www.richard.swanson.com/Multi.html Swanson’s Tops are everywhere throughout the landscape in the likely and the most unlikely places. We wondered, how did he get that one up there? This is the story of the Archie Bray, treasures around every corner and on every pinnacle.

For you the reader to truly understand and experience the Archie Bray you just have to go there. The Bray is just one of those magic places that hold a different and unique adventure for everyone.

Your trip to the Archie Bray will be punctuated with encounters with current Resident Artists working in and out of their studios. The New Resident Studios are open to visitors and give you the opportunity to meet and watch the artists work.

The Bray Art Gallery is host to current and past artists; their work is on display and for sale. If you want to get your hands dirty, you can take classes and attend art clay workshops throughout the year taught by the leading Artists in the field today.

As we left Kate had the Archie Bray summer clay workshop schedule in hand. This years summer workshop schedule offers the young artist an impressive choice of opportunities to learn from today’s masters in the field. Kate also picked up a product catalog from the Archie Bray Clay Business. The Clay Business sells, well clay and all the material and tools the artist needs. After years of the best of the best, the Clay business is an impressive resource, and they ship. Kate was very excited about the variety and colors of glazes stocked in the shop.

So if you live in Montana or are going to visit, make the Archie Bray a mandatory stop or day-trip on your schedule, you won’t be disappointed.

As Kate and I keenly watched for deer on our three-hour trip back home through the Swan, our lively conversation about the Archie Bray fueled ideas and our imaginations.

New Wood-fired Kiln aera

Check out the Archie Bray Foundation Website. http://www.archiebray.org/

Filed under: American Folk Art, Art, Art Marketing, Art News, How to survive as a Working Artists, Journalism, News, Uncategorized , Archie Bray Foundation, Artists Trips, Ceramic Art, Clay, Modern Craft, Montana Art, Montana Artists, Montana Vacations, Wonderland

Do the Arts Need a National Bailout?

Do the Arts Need a National Bailout?

Times are tough for the Arts in America. Even the 50 million dollars in stimulus money won’t help much as endowment funds nationwide are trashed. Robert Lynch, points out the 50 million in new money will do little to cover losses art organizations have suffered this year. Lynch uses San Francisco as an example, where art organizations have lost an estimated 40 million in state funding alone. The current loss of revenue in the arts nationwide will surely amount to billions of dollars.

Conversation with Robert Lynch, NewsHour post by Jeffery Brown

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/art/blog/2009/03/conversation-robert-lynch-president-americans-for-the-arts.html

Floyd Norris asks the question “What are art organization suppose to do”? He points out that many small organizations are devastated today and they have little financial power to offset their losses. He points out colleges are in the same boat. I would point out that the Big Art organizations are too.

In fact, I would suggest our largest art organizations may be in more trouble than our small ones. The big guys have big budgets and have suffered big losses. Big organizations also have the need and expense of large staffs. A small organization can in many instances reduce paid staff and maintain functional viability with a volunteer work force until the economy improves. Big organizations simply cannot or could not function without their professional staffs. Two very different worlds exist today where reality and needs are dramatically different as are fundamental funding realities. Many large museums spend more money on one exhibit or performance production than small organizations spend in their yearly operational budget expenditures. It may turn out that the weak market survives this crisis and in the end comes out much stronger.

The Money is Gone Now What by Floyd Norris NYT

“There was outrage earlier this year when Brandeis University announced plans to close its art museum and sell the paintings. The university’s endowment was devastated by bad investments.

What do people opposed to the sale of paintings think suddenly poor institutions should do? Close? Seek government bailouts? Should Brandeis close down a few academic departments, or cut back on scholarships, to keep its art?

Brandeis is hardly the only college whose endowment has contracted sharply. I suspect that when the final numbers are in — and colleges are not exactly rushing to disclose the sad details — it will turn out that colleges as a group did far worse than the stock market while the market was doing horribly”. Floyd Norris NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/20/business/20norris.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

The question remains “Do you sell off your assets to meet your budgetary needs”?

As Ford W. Bell says in his letter to the editor, to do so would violate the public trust.

Letter to the Editor from:

Ford W. Bell
President
American Association of Museums
Washington, March 23, 2009

“Allowing a museum to peddle its collection to cover operating debts would be like allowing a financial fiduciary, such as a bank, to raid assets held in trust to cover a hole in its own balance sheet”. Ford W. Bell

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/31/opinion/lweb31museums.html

The fact is the Banks essentially did exactly what Mr. Ford says museums should not do, they raided assets held in trust for their customers through a series of bad investments. Just ask your elderly parents who’s retirement accounts are now only worth a fraction of what they were a year ago. Just look at your IRA or just about any other secure investment account you have, even trust funds. The reality of the facts, the reality of the depth of this economic crisis is reflected in the figures. It is no different for the Arts.

This past Sunday I was trying to help my youngest daughter with her college economics homework, she is an art student taking an economics course. I would compare my help to a monkey trying to perform brain surgery with a stick. I was going compare the monkey with a paintbrush in hand creating a master work of art to myself as an artist. I quickly realized that the monkey may in fact be far more skilled than I; in the creation of masterpieces and probably would quickly develop a profitable market for his art. I am looking for a monkey all I have is two old dogs who sleep most of the day and won’t work.

We were looking at the Elasticity of markets, Supply and Demand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

The example we were using was the farm market. In the example variables increased production while demand remained the same. When demand is lower than production increases in supply drive down profits, so even if you produce more at less expense you still make the same profit or less. Only when demand is higher than available production do profits rise, but even then given the variables over all income can remain flat. For example if a natural disaster creates a loss of production the increased demand raises prices but the loss of production balances the profits.

So it seems to me that if for example museums start to sell off assets, works of art the fire sale will drive value and profit down and in the long run everyone will lose. Just look at the Auto Companies or the housing market. Great deals will emerge from the flood of art into a depressed market but the flood will devastate value and profit. Perhaps Art Organizations can learn from the lessons of farming. Farmers often store their grain until markets become favorable.

Perhaps as bad as it will sound Museums and other Art Organization should temporarily close or reduce schedules until the viability of the market returns. They then would still have their assets. Many large organizations could use their collections or their talent in better or more efficient ways to reduce operating costs and maintain profits. Maybe they could find other ways to generate income from their collections and at the same time help smaller organizations present exhibits and performances that are more dynamic.

As an example, a big organization could loan artwork to a small organization. The two could share revenue generated by the exhibit as partners. Done creatively smaller organizations could increase the quality of their exhibits and stimulate increased attendance/audience. The big organization could create income from under utilized parts of their collection and increase audience and income. After all most big museums only exhibit small portions of their collections at any given time. Activity creates income for everybody.

I am sure Brandeis University could find another organization that would love to show artwork from their collection. They could also earn income from the loans of artwork even if the Rose Museum temporarily closed. They could possibly find more value in keeping their collection intact than they will earn by selling it off as a depreciated asset. Of course, they would have to figure out how to make a program work in a distressed market, but they are a university. Surely, someone on the university staff can figure out a smart (Creative) way to proceed forward and create a profitable program.

Maybe they could ask the folks over at the Museum Loan Network for advice; they have been working with large organizations for years, helping those organizations use their collections more effectively.

Museum Loan Network

http://dl.lib.brown.edu/mln/about.html

As an example: One organization reduces operational activities. They collaborate with an organization that is in better shape. They charge a reasonable fee to package and ship the exhibit. Then both organizations share revenue generated by exhibit. Movie companies have operated this way successfully for years. Your local movie theaters make profit from supportive activities, like popcorn and soft drink sales. Surely, the brainpower in the Arts can figure out supportive revenue programs combined with admission fees and memberships sales. Even the last two areas will produce profit when program quality and interest increase.

Small potatoes, well small potatoes can add up to big profits. Just look at what Matt Jones in Seattle has accomplished with his Mashed Potatoes program at Gasworks Gallery in Seattle. The Cooperative Gallery charges an admission fee paid for in potatoes or food for the food bank. They have raised millions of pounds of potatoes and other food supplies for the local food bank one potato at a time. http://www.mashedpotatoes.org/

Gasworks Gallery: http://gasworksgallery.com/

Matt Jones Delivers 50,000 pounds of potatoes You Tube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=122fGSv4T8o

My advice to the Art Organizations of America is get creative and find sustainable solutions to your problems before you sell the cow for some magic beans.

Filed under: Art, Art Marketing, Art News, Culture Economey, How to survive as a Working Artists, Investing, Journalism, Media, Movies, News, Politics, Uncategorized , Art News, Art Organizations, Bail out, Bail Out for the Arts, Creative Art, Fundraising, Money for the Arts, Museum Management

Big Art Big Theft; The Lawrence B. Salander Indictment

Big Art Big Theft;

The Lawrence B. Salander Indictment

Lawrence B. Salander of O’Reilly Galleries LLC was arrested on a 100 count indictment. Below, is a news release from the New York District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau about the case?

The indictment outlines how Salander built one of the most powerful art empires on fraud and deceit while he lived life as large as any Wall Street mogul did. Salander’s built an empire built based on illusion and manipulation of those who trusted him. He has pled not guilty to all charges. I predict that if Salander goes to trial that it will be the first time the secret details of how the Big Art Market functions will come to light and we will all learn the truth behind closed doors.

Link to NYC District Attorney Website

http://manhattanda.org/whatsnew/press/2009-03-26.shtml

DISTRICT ATTORNEY – NEW YORK COUNTY

NEWS RELEASE
March 26, 2009

Contact: Alicia Maxey Greene
212-335-9400

Manhattan District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau announced today the arrest and 100-count indictment of former art gallery owner LAWRENCE B. SALANDER and the SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES, LLC for stealing $88 million from investors, owners, and a bank.

The defendants, SALANDER, 59, and the SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES, have been indicted on multiple charges of grand larceny, securities fraud, scheme to defraud, forgery, criminal possession of a forged instrument, falsifying business records, and perjury against SALANDER. The crimes charged in the indictment occurred between July 1994 and November 2007.

The investigation leading to today’s indictment revealed that SALANDER, the manager and co-owner of the SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES, defrauded 26 victims resulting in the theft of millions of dollars. SALANDER stole from his victims in two primary ways: he sold artwork not owned by him and kept the money; and lured investment money in fraudulent investment opportunities.

Investors in this case are individuals or entities that paid cash in exchange for an ownership interest in a work of art. Investment deals were presented in two ways, as a pre-sale or speculative investment. In pre-sales, SALANDER represented to an investor that a work of art had already been sold to a buyer who needed time to pay. SALANDER told the investor that he could purchase a percentage of the work based on SALANDER’s actual cost and then share a corresponding percentage of the sales price when it was paid. For example: SALANDER would claim that he purchased a work of art for $500,000 and had a buyer who agreed to pay $1 million in the future. SALANDER offered the investor a 50 percent interest in the art work for $250,000 with the assurance that upon receipt of the purchase price the investor would receive his initial investment plus an additional $250,000 as profit. In a speculative investment, SALANDER offered an investor the opportunity to purchase a work of art with him at cost, and thereafter SALANDER would sell the artwork at a greatly increased value and they would split the profit.

The fraud in each investment opportunity occurred when SALANDER did not own the work of art he offered for investment in whole or in part, or he misrepresented the actual terms of the investment. The misrepresented terms included: inflation of the purported cost (cost fraud), the sale of greater than 100 percent interest in a single work (oversale), the fabrication of the existence of the pre-sale (ghost investment), failure to pay the return when the money came in on the purported investment, or the misrepresentation of the amount payable to the investor (fraudulent retention).

For example: Renaissance Art Investors, LLC (RAI) was one of the gallery’s largest investors. RAI paid SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES $42 million at closing for approximately 328 Renaissance works of art.  As part of the deal, RAI, which was put together by the Schupak Group, a merchant bank owned by Donald Schupak and his son Andrew Schupak, simultaneously consigned the works back to SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES to market and sell. The $42 million was paid based upon SALANDER’s representations of the deal. However, SALANDER misrepresented almost every aspect of this investment including the cost and source of the works sold. For example, SALANDER claimed to have purchased the majority of Renaissance artworks from private dealers and estates mostly throughout Europe, yet the investigation revealed that he actually purchased a large number of works of art from public auction houses throughout Europe and the United States. SALANDER also intentionally withheld from RAI the reporting of millions of dollars in sales of RAI artworks after the closing of the deal and failed to turn over the proceeds of the sale. To support his misrepresentations, SALANDER provided RAI with forged invoices, fraudulent cash disbursement entries, falsified internal documents reflecting source and cost data, and falsified monthly inventories.

Owners of art as used in this case are individuals or estates that own works of art and consign them to the gallery for sale, exhibition, or appraisal. Upon the sale of artworks at agreed upon prices, the owners were to receive the balance of the sale price minus the commission owed the gallery. The majority of the estates are the heirs of prominent 20th Century American artists, including the estates of Stuart Davis, Ralston Crawford, Elie Nadelman, Louis Kahn, Giorgio Cavallon, George McNeil, Suzy Frelinghuysen and George Morris. The thefts from this category of victims occurred pursuant to unauthorized transactions including: sales below owners’ authorized prices, sales of artwork not delivered for sale at the time of the transactions, the use of the artworks as investment vehicles for third parties, or the use of the artworks to satisfy debts owed to third parties. These transactions were completed without consent from, notice to, or payment to the owners.

For example: in the case of the Estate of Stuart Davis, SALANDER and the SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES sold over 50 Stuart Davis works of art consigned by the estate. The evidence showed that a majority of those works were sold without authorization at significantly reduced prices and without notice and payment to the Davis estate, a theft totaling over $6.7 million.  Altogether, the SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES failed to produce or pay for 96 Davis works of art consigned to the gallery by the estate after repeated demands for the return of all works.

The bank in this case is the Bank of America from which SALANDER applied for a personal loan for himself and his wife, Julie.  In support of his loan application, SALANDER offered certain artwork as security and provided documents to establish that his wife owned that artwork.  In fact, several pieces were never owned by LAWRENCE SALANDER nor Julie Salander, but were owned by other individuals, including John McEnroe and the Estate of Dr. Alexander Pearlman. After previous offerings of collateral were rejected, these false filings enabled SALANDER to obtain a $2 million loan.

The investigation further revealed that SALANDER used the stolen funds for two primary purposes: to finance his self-imposed mission to corner the market in Renaissance Art, and to support his extravagant lifestyle, which included travel by private jet within the United States and to Europe, a lavish party for his wife at the Frick Collection, and the purchase and maintenance of his Manhattan townhouse and 66-acre estate in Millbrook, Dutchess County, New York.

He co-founded SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES in 1976. In 2005, the gallery moved from its original location on 79th Street to a five-story building located at 22 East 71st Street. He continued to control the daily business practices of the gallery until it closed in November 2007, pursuant to the filing of an involuntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy case.

The indictment charges SALANDER with 14 counts and the SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES with 13 counts of Grand Larceny in the First Degree, a class B Felony, which is punishable by up to 8⅓ to 25 years in prison; each defendant with 10  counts of Grand Larceny in the Second Degree, a class C felony, which is punishable by up to 5 to 15 years in prison; 3 counts of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, 5 counts of Forgery in the Second Degree, and 5 counts of Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree, all class D felonies, which are punishable by up to 2⅓ to 7 years in prison; 6 counts of Securities Fraud under the Martin Act (General Business Law §352-c(6)), 1 count of Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree, and 55 counts against SALANDER and 53 counts against the SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES of Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree, all class E felonies, which are punishable by up to 1⅓ to 4 years in prison. SALANDER was also charged with 1 count of Perjury in the First Degree, a class D felony, which is punishable by up to 2⅓ to 7 years in prison.

Mr. Morgenthau thanked Detective Mark Fishstein of the New York City Police Department Major Case Squad for his assistance in the investigation.

Deputy Bureau Chief Micki Shulman and Assistant District Attorney Tanya Apparicio of the Frauds Bureau presented the case to the grand jury under the supervision of Frauds Bureau Chief Michael Kitsis and Deputy Bureau Chief Jeannette Molina and Chief of the Investigations Division Patrick Dugan.  Investigators Jeremy Rosenberg,  Jack Patterson, Siobhan Berry and Reginald Barometre assisted in the investigation under the supervision of Chief Investigator Joseph Pennisi and Deputy Chief Terence Mulderrig.  Others involved in the investigation included Investigative Analyst Yiyang Wu, and Trial Preparation Assistants David Lamb and Daniel Biller of the Frauds Bureau, and Financial Investigator Jay Liang supervised by Frank Puma, Chief of the Financial Crimes Bureau. IT Analyst Selena Ley and her supervisor, IT Deputy Director Steven Moran, also assisted.

Defendant Information:

LAWRENCE SALANDER, 5/29/49
Deep Hollow Road
Millbrook, New York

SALANDER-O’REILLY GALLERIES, LLC
22 East 71st Street
New York, New York

Filed under: Art, Art Marketing, Art News, Culture Economey, Investing, Journalism, Media, News, On Art, Uncategorized , Art Collecting, Art Market News, Art Theft, Investing in Art, Lawrence B. Salander

Investing in Big Art big gains or big losses another Secret Revealed

Investing in Big Art big gains or big losses another Secret Revealed

Tonight when I opened my Google News, there it was, another dirty secret made headlines. This time New York Art Dealer Lawrence B Salander indicted on the charge, he stole 88 million dollars from Art Investors, Collectors and Artists that consigned work with his upscale New York Gallery.

Art Dealer Is Charged With Stealing 88 Million

By James Barron New York Times, March 26, 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/nyregion/27indict.html?ref=nyregion

Seems Mr. Salander sold the same painting to more than one buyer and that he used artwork that he did not own as collateral to barrow money. He also defrauded Artists who consigned work with his gallery. The article by James Barron is a more complete picture and I am sure that as this case goes to court more information will come to light. In fact, the real figure may be closer to 100 million according to Barron’s sources.

It just makes me sick when these kinds of things happen to artists and art collectors who are our patrons. We as artists go to galleries for representation because we need help marketing and selling our work. We need to make a living and we want collectors to collect our work. Then to be Ripped Off or to have our patrons Ripped Off is just plan Bad Business for all of us. I am not suggesting that Mr. Salander is representative of the art market as a whole but he does represent the bad side of a market fraught with risk.

As I have said many times before “Do Your Homework” before you buy, invest or consign your artwork to anybody. But how do you guard against someone like Salander. He is a Dealer who is established and appears to be respectable and has been around for a long time. I guess you just have to dig harder and use your gut intuition as your guide. If a deal is too sweet, beware. It is a deal probably too good to be true.

Barron’s NYT article says that someone with the investigation attempted to contact Robert De Niro Sr. about his paintings and his connection with Salander but that he didn’t return the phone call. Mr. De Niro Sr. Died in 1993. He is the father of actor Robert De Niro.

I was confused when I read about De Niro. I had exhibited several of his paintings in 2000 as part of an Abstract Expressionist Exhibit. I knew he had passed away. De Niro Sr. was part of the now famous group of painters the Abstract Expressionists.

Maybe they were referring to his son who is trying to recover 12 of his Dads paintings.

As it turns out Salander is accused of stealing 12 of De Niro Sr. paintings that had been consigned to him. Read the Article

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11202007/news/regionalnews/deniro_demands_pop_art_239232.htm

About Robert De Niro Sr. Abstract Expressionist 1922-1993

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2005-06-20-deniro_x.htm

http://www.artcyclopedia.com/artists/de_niro_sr_robert.html

About Lawrence B. Salander

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/lawrence_b_salander/index.html?inline=nyt-per

Bloomberg News

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=a.95n8ZwIPv8&refer=muse

Filed under: Art, Art News, Investing, Media, News, On Art , Abstract Expressionism, Art Theft, Investing in Art, Lawrence B. Salander, Robert De Niro Sr.

Americas Cultural Treasures on Sale

Americas Cultural Treasures on Sale

• A Bill in the New York Legislature Would Regulate the Sale of Museum Art Collections. If the Bill passes, it would make it illegal for a museum to sell parts of their collections to cover operating costs.

New York Times-related article

Bill seeks to Regulate Museums Art Sales

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/18/arts/design/18rege.html

Link to a copy of the Proposed Museum Bill

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/arts/03182009-bill.pdf

• The Question

Can or Should a Museum be allowed to sell parts of its art collection to cover operating expenses?

This is not a new question today just because many museums find themselves facing financial deficits in today’s economic crisis. It is a long-standing question has been unanswered by the law. Most Museums operate under a voluntary code of ethics that governs their decisions based on the principles or standards set by the industry. But the code of ethics has few teeth except shunning by other intuitions and professionals in the field and the code does little to stop un-sound or un-ethical practices.

Quoted from NYT article by Robin Pogrebin

“The two notions of deaccessioning and debt have to be de-coupled,” said Anne W. Ackerson, the director of the Museum Association of New York. “It seems that when some institutions get into financial trouble, they look to their collections as a way to get out.”

“Deaccessioning to pay the bills is strongly condemned in the museum world. The Association of Art Museum Directors, a national group, strictly prohibits the sale of artworks to cover anything but the acquisition of art. The group imposed sanctions on the National Academy for its sale, advising other institutions not to collaborate with or make loans to the academy”.

Link to the Museum ICOM Code of Ethics 2006 Document

http://icom.museum/ethics.html#intro

• An example of the problem is the case of Brandeis University. In January, they announced that they would close the Rose Art Museum and sell the collection to balance their budget.

The management of Museum collections is a difficult task fraught with many obstacles and often occurs behind closed doors out of the publics view. These often-secret deals are the very issue of the proposed law. When a decision such as the sale of the Rose Museum collection becomes public a lot of attention is focused on what is happening and why. Donor’s like the Rose Family get upset and as word spreads other donors out there in the world start to ask important questions about their donations to not only the museum in question but to museums they support.

Rose Art Museum To Be Closed

http://media.www.thejusticeonline.com/media/storage/paper573/news/2009/01/27/News/Rose-Art.Museum.To.Be.Closed-3599143.shtml?reffeature=recentlycommentedstoriestab

Rose Family Condemns University

http://media.www.thejusticeonline.com/media/storage/paper573/news/2009/03/17/News/Rose-Family.Condemns.University-3673802.shtml?reffeature=recentlycommentedstoriestab

• Every museum regardless of size or type has the problem of collection management.

Every collection has as in the case of Art Museums, Artworks that do not severe the scope of their respective collection and exhibition programs. Often artworks come into collections as donations past and present that have no real importance to a museums focus. These artworks are often just stored if they represent a direction, the museum may develop in the future. Sometimes the artwork fits the museums mission but is in a condition that prevents it from being exhibited until the artwork can be stabilized through preservation or restoration. Other times the artwork is simply not of value to the collection because it just doesn’t fit current or future plans of the museum. In that case rather than just store the artwork museums opt to deaccession or sell the artwork to another museum that has a collection the artwork would be a value too. Or they sell it to a collector if there is no other buyer.

Sometimes artworks are traded if a trade meets the needs of both parties. Some museums will loan artworks to other museums that need the artwork to exhibit with their collection in exchange for restoration or preservation when they cannot afford the cost themselves.

When work is deaccessioned, sold the money is ethically spent to either buy new artwork that meets the collection needs of the museum or used to pay for the cost of preservation of existing important artworks in their collections.

A museum that has a good collections management policy will create deeds of trust that governs the accessioning and deaccessioning of artworks. These documents are legal and binding and require that Museums make good and solid judgments when choosing artworks for their collections. But in the case of many older institutions and also new ones these agreements were not or are not part of their policy and artworks were accessioned into collections for a plethora of reasons. Often the reason was political to keep a major donor happy. Fifty years later, when the donor is long gone the museum still has the artwork and has little or no use for it today. As the organization, the museum matures and develops a sound; collection management policy, they still have the issue these types of artworks, these gifts are still in their collections. The deaccessioning of these treasures must be, dealt with in an ethical manner to preserve the purpose and function of museums as a whole. This is where the law can help museum professionals manage their collections and their Boards of Directors or at least their decisions.

• The dynamics of a Board change continuously and I think is the most difficult part of managing a museum or for that matter any corporation private or non-profit.

Attracting and retaining good Board members is an art and requires skill, hard work and above all Strong Policies. Boards can act in ways that are disastrous and harmful to the organization with out proper regulation, rules or by-laws that govern their behavior legally. Perhaps we can create a new term “The AIG Factor”! The rules that govern museums and other organizations established in their corporate structure vary widely.

• In the case of the Rose, the Director was informed of the decision to close the museum and sell the collection after the decision was made.

The Director had no say or input into the decision making process. In some organizations, this would not be the case, but even under the best of circumstances, the Board of Directors may in fact have the last word. They can just fire the Director who opposes their decisions.

Today many organizations are challenged by the current economic crisis. It is important to remember that there is always going to be good economic times and challenges in the future. Museum’s are here for the long haul and museum professionals have to protect the integrity of their institutions for the greater public good. Too, allow boards simply to sell off the collection assets when the going gets tough is not realistic long-term management.

Like in the case of the Rose, once the museum is gone it will be gone for good, as will be the treasure in your local art museum if it is sold.

In this instance, the Law if created would only govern New York State. I think it is time for a national uniform set of laws to govern the public trust. I have certainly understated the complexity of the problem and an issue here, what I have attempted to do is simplify a very complex and real problem that is widespread and concerns every art museum in the nation.

• What Happening in your Art Museum?

Do the Arts need a National Bailout?

http://davideubank.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/do-the-arts-need-a-national-bailout/

Filed under: Art, Art Marketing, Art News, Culture Economey, News, On Art, Politics, Uncategorized , Art Collecting, Art Collections, Art Law, Museum Code of Ethics, Museum Managment, New York Museum Law, Rose Art Museum

The Luce Foundation Center for American Art has a Great Website

Back of the Yards Mitchell Siporin 1938

I am always looking for exciting Art Websites and the Luce Foundation Center for American Art is a good one.

 

•  The center has a light box program that you can view its 3500 Artworks. You can even create your own personal collection, your favorites.

The Website is not as good as going to the Luce Center, which occupies three floors in the west wing of the Smithsonian, but if you cannot get to Washington, it is a close second.

The center is an open storage program that exhibits or openly stores artworks from the Smithsonian’s American Collection. That in its self is a great idea and gives you and me access to parts of the National Collection that would otherwise be locked away in traditional storage.

 The Website creates access to the collection beyond the walls of the museum and is a great resource on American Art.

•  Luce Foundation Center for American Art

http://americanart.si.edu/luce/index.cfm

Filed under: American Folk Art, Art, Art News, Art Prints, News, On Art, Painting, african art , American Art, Center, for, Foundation, Luce, Smithsonian, Websites