Do you email galleries or walk in with work under your arm?
I've done both over the years and honestly the walk-in is underrated in the right circumstances. I remember showing up in Paris once with two small panels wrapped in newspaper, asked to see the owner, she looked at them for maybe three minutes and that was the start of a real relationship. Email is safer but it's also one of sixty in an inbox.
I know some people think walking in is pushy or old-fashioned. Maybe it is. But it worked for me more than any cold email ever did.
Which one do you actually do, and did it ever land?
2
2commentsSaveFollow threadShare
I've only ever emailed, mostly because I don't think my work makes sense as a walk-in. Small paper pieces don't catch anyone across a room, and I'd rather they read a short note than stand there while I unwrap something they have to squint at. But I get what you mean about the inbox problem. I've started sending emails with one image only and almost no text, and the responses went up noticeably. People don't want to read about the work, they want to know if they want to look at it.
The Paris story is nice though. There's something about being present with the actual object that no email can do. Maybe I'm just too shy for it.
The one-image thing is smart. You're right that people decide in a second whether they want to look, and text just delays that decision. I should steal that.
And fair point about small paper pieces. Walk-in works when the object can hold a wall or a hand across a room. If it needs a closer look anyway, you're not losing anything by email.
Still, the being present with the work is real. Not for the looking, for the conversation around it. The owner in Paris asked me one question about the light and we talked twenty minutes. That never happens in an inbox, no matter how good the email is.