Personally, I think it’s ridiculous, and has made me reconsider exhibition cost/benefits. It does add up, as you say. OTOH, I still exhibit in major shows, because it’s good for our community as a whole.
> On Oct 18, 2016, at 11:39 PM, Karen Ackoff <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I’ve been entering a few exhibitions lately, and it’s troubling to find that more and more galleries do not insure the work while it is in their possession. They want the right to use your images in their publicity materials, some require the work be for sale and of course they get a percentage of the sale price, and there is an entry fee. All of that is fine… and I am used to paying shipping/insurance there and back. But they don’t insure it while it is in their possession.
> My choice would be to get private insurance or not to submit. I did look into private insurance, but my homeowner’s will only insure artwork up to $1000, and my work is priced higher than that. I’m sure I could pursue other insurance companies, and I’m sure it wouldn’t be cheap. If I can submit a print, then insurance is less of an issue, but there is still the cost of the frame and museum/plexi (no glass as the work is shipped).
> The galleries profit from the exhibition and take no responsibility other than “reasonable care” (which is conveniently vague).
> I’m surprised that this seems to be more and more common. Wondering what you have experienced, and what you think about this.
> Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at
Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at