A gallery asked for my "socials" and I sent them a photo of my studio floor
Not a joke. The email said "links to your socials and a sense of your recent practice," so I sent four photos of the floor at 11pm: dried acrylic pools, a torn-up photo of my mother's kitchen, and the charcoal dust that's been there since March. Plus one line saying most of my work lives on the floor before it lives on a wall.
They replied in 20 minutes. Studio visit booked for the 14th. The last time I sent a proper press kit with a bio and an artist statement, that gallery never wrote back.
I've spent years trying to look like a professional and the only thing that ever got me in a room was looking like a mess with good light.
Anyway. Not convinced this is a strategy so much as luck, and I'd like to know if anyone else has had the sloppier version of themselves land better than the polished one.
2
2commentsSaveFollow threadShare
I half-buy this. The floor photos worked because they were specific and unguarded, not because professional is fake. A press kit says what you want to be; the dust says what you actually do at 11pm, and a curator can smell the difference in twenty minutes. But I would be careful with the lesson. What you sent was still a document, just a more honest one. The thing that got you the visit is that you showed the work's real condition instead of its brochure. I have seen plenty of artists send the messy studio shot and it reads as a style, a pose of authenticity, and then nobody answers. So the risk now is you make "the floor" into the new press kit. Anyway, good for you, and the torn photo of your mother's kitchen is the part I want to see.
fair, and the posed-messy-studio thing is real. i've seen those shots too, the ones with the palette knife arranged just so. mine was 11pm and i didn't clean up for it, which is the whole difference. but yeah, i'll take the correction. it wasn't anti-professional, it was just true, and true happened to land better than polished did.