We are back with the second part of the conversation with Tsjalling from the Netherlands.

Autograph by Jake and Dinos Chapman, from Tsjalling’s collection.

You have started something called “The 100,- EUR collection”. You want to buy an artwork under 100,- EUR every month for the duration of one year. You are about half way through … tell us about that.

This collection is a follow-up of some bar talk with IC co-founder Christian Schwarm. We talked about a new project after your Collector’s Duel and this was one of them. Sorry for nicking the idea!

You’re welcome, Tsjalling, I’ll just be nicking one of yours in the future …

My budget to spend on art is not very large, so it’s either buy one or two larger works a year, or this. I’m a bit of a shop-a-holic, so trying to buy something new every month is better for me.

My girlfriend Mieke and I search the internet to find artists we like. Nowadays a lot of young artists have an online shop, so that way we find great stuff from all over the world, some even of quite famous artists. But it does have to fit into my collection. But now being halfway I find it more difficult than I first thought though. It’s hard to find something you really love on first sight.

“A trip on Oct 22, 2009 in Turkey” by David Horvitz from Tsjalling’s collection

I find it hard to agree with that. I find something worth buying almost every other week. What makes it difficult for you? Is it the problem of actually finding things or is it difficult to fall in love with something you see on the web but not in real life?

There is so much on the internet. I sometimes find it hard to see the quality in things. Maybe as you say: it’s hard to fall in love with something you don’t see. And I don’t really collect artist’s books or records like you do, so that’s a difference as well.

You are also listing the prices you have paid for the works. Some collectors make funny faces when asked what they have spent, even in that price range and claim it has nothing to with money. Why do you think that is?

Art has to do with money, but the experience of it hasn’t. Works that are affordable can have as great an influence on you as can very expensive things, but the best things tend to have a very high price. Never mind that though, you can go see them in a museum.

To me it doesn’t really matter what I paid for a work, but I want to show starting collectors that you can get great stuff for a nice price. And people did contact me about where I got some of the work, so it really works! I did hesitate about putting the prices there though, because of the artists. Although most things I bought come from their own internet stores, I’m not sure whether they like it when people think their work is maybe too cheap. Maybe it could put more advanced buyers of.

Why people don’t want to talk prices I don’t know. Maybe they think it is showing off their wealth. But who cares? Most people that collect know what prices you pay for certain work, so everyone will know anyway.

You said you want to encourage starting collectors by showing them that the price range for great art starts at “affordable”. Would you say you actively want to help younger collectors? Is this something maybe more collectors should put an effort in?

Yes, I could say I’d like to turn other people into collectors I guess. You can get a lot of joy out of buying art that is different from seeing art just in museums. You have to think about things like: do you want to live with it, is it worth what your paying for it, are you going to like this in some time?
And I do think it is a good thing if more experienced collectors help guide younger collectors, but I’m a bit sceptical on courses in collecting. What do people learn there? How to look, what to buy? I don’t really know, but I think it is important to start buying with your gut, not to much your brain. Don’t be unsure about what you buy, if you like it, it’s good!

Usually experienced or “successful” collectors (who are most often well equipped with funds) get asked to give advice to young collectors. Which is fair enough, but let’s turn it upside down a little. You have been collecting for some time now, in your own ways. What kind of advice would you give to a “senior” collector?

Keep on buying work by artists that are just starting. Instead of spending 30.000,- EUR on your fifth Jonathan Meese or Rineke Dijkstra make ten or maybe even twenty young artists happy with buying their work. They need it more, not only financially, but also as recognition and as encouragement to go on making art. I know quite a few young artists, and they have a really hard time, and there are a lot, even good ones, that quit after a few years because of lack of support from collectors: they need sales to get into and keep their galleries, they need galleries to get exhibitions in museums, articles in magazines and so on.

Let’s be specific. Could you give us three artists you would suggest an experienced collector should buy?

Let’s stay in The Netherlands for that ok?

A great young sculptor from Germany who works in Amsterdam is David Jablonowski (→ link)

I love the drawings of Marc Nagtzaam. Great geometrical compositions in pencil. (→ link)

Hans Hoekstra. Very sensitive paintings, just won the Royal Price for Painting in Holland. (→ link)

A nice selection for everyone.

I have been interviewed by you once and I know you can ask tricky questions. What is the question I haven’t asked you? And bare in mind that it’s you who has to answer it. No wait … forget that part again…

Tommi: The first time we met, you were proud that you didn’t own a car, so you could spend all your money on art. But now you do own a car. Isn’t that a bit hypocritical? Are you spending less on art now?

Me: Well, when we first met I didn’t have a drivers license either, so easy talking! I own the car to get more experience in driving, and it allows me to go to galleries and museums out of town. So actually it’s much better for my collection. And I haven’t bought less art. I just stopped buying the large number of CDs, DVDs and books I did before …

Tsjalling’s car

So not mp3 is killing the music industry, art is! What would you like me to ask the next collector?

I read that for more accomplished collectors the buying is more important than the actual owning of the artwork. Do you still get the same kick out of owning and enjoying new art? Is the hunt really more important than the catch?

Well, thank you Tsjalling for your time and your stories. I shall now go out and find an “accomplished collector” to get an answer to that question.

Tsjalling Venema is what one would probably call a “young collector”. I guess you’d be able to call him that in twenty years time. I can not imagine his personality to drop that atmosphere of youth just because the earth keeps revolving around the sun. He is from the Netherlands and if you ever get the chance to meet him, do! But beware, his passion and excitement are quite contagious …

Here is part 1 with pictures:
(Text only over at IC: → http://bit.ly/bI9iZ3)

Well, Tsjalling, the two collectors before you have asked two questions. One regarded the situation of which artwork you would put back in the fire to collect insurance money for and Randi asks “Why did you buy your first work of art?”

Which question would you rather answer? And then please tell us why you bought your first artwork, this one is somewhat mandatory …

I guess I’ll have to answer both of them then…

When I was fifteen, I started collecting autographs of famous and less famous artists, because I thought I couldn’t afford buying real artworks. This way I met a local artist [Lode Pemmelaar] who had the same hobby. We became friends and when I ran into one of his (cheaper) silkscreens in a gallery, I bought it. After this I found out that you could find artworks at a reasonable price, so I started buying more and more.

“Untitled” – Lode Pemmelaar

The work I’d leave in my home when on fire is a photo by Wim Bosch. Definitely not because I don’t like it, on the contrary! But it is a work with a large edition and I know I can still buy a new one. I’d leave it because I put a wrong frame on it. I’m friends with the artist now, and he likes his work to be stuck on aluminum without glass in front of it. Not the way I framed it. So maybe this way I could put it right.

The wrong frame.

In the Netherlands, young collectors can get very cheap loans to buy art. What’s up with that? How does that work?

With the KunstKoopRegeling (art buying scheme → link) you can get an interest free loan. This is only in selected galleries though, but most larger galleries participate in it. The government funded Mondriaan Fund pays the interest for you, and you have to make a deposit of only 10 percent. It’s possible to get a lone from 450,- EUR to 7000,- EUR , so also experienced collectors can buy works of art.

Now that’s nice, to allow the experienced collectors to participate as well, isn’t it? Did you ever buy your art on such a loan?

No, I didn’t, because you have to have a fixed contract with your employer and I didn’t have one until a year ago. (This part of the scheme sucks! The strange thing is that you can get a loan if you’re on government benefits or as a student.)

How about a proper “stipend” for collectors? Here is an idea: Why not shift all the arts funds of a country from museums to stipends for collectors? Is that a good idea or a stupid idea? I can’t decide …

First something else: I heard that in Germany you don’t have to pay taxes for art, in The Netherlands you do. It would be a great idea to make buying art tax free, although I am not sure it would really make a difference, because the taxes aren’t that high (6%).

Actually, you do pay taxes on art. Most of it comes in at 7% but, at least as far as I understand it, your Wim Bosch edition for example would clock in at 19%. Why did I bring this up? I don’t even like the topic! And there still lingers the idea of a “stipend for collectors”. I have a hunch it is a bad idea …

Museums are a great way to explore art if you are new to it, they are a feeding ground for “newbies” more than galleries are. They are also a place where artists can present themselves to bigger audiences. Their influence on the general public is very important. Collectors don’t have this influence. They are good for the production of art (read: the artist), but not so for the showing of it, as most work stays “at home”.

Then there’s the question of who you should give these stipends to? Who will buy what art? Sorry to say, most people don’t have a very accomplished taste, they go for things they understand, as you can see for example of the winner of the popular Dutch Artist of the Year election, Ans Markus (→ link) Most people wouldn’t vote for one of my favourite artists, B.C. Epker (→ link) , although his work is owned by more museums. Do you think most people would buy a work by Sol LeWitt or Joseph Beuys? I don’t think so.

So let’s keep those stipends coming to the museums, so the general public will see these artist we collectors care about!

Wow, your last statement made a knot in my brain. I was actually thinking of giving the money to collectors who have already shown that they have taste. But then you would need a jury or something to decide whether you, Tsjalling, qualify or not … this is too complicated. I agree. Let’s give the money to museums. At least then we can complain about them buying boring stuff.

In the second part of the conversation, Tsjalling talks about his “The 100,- EUR Collection” and responds to the question what kind of advice he would give an experienced collector …

Øystein Aasan (left) and Randi Thommessen at “la vitrine”, Paris.

This is the second part of our e-mail conversation, again, in slightly abbreviated form. For full text, please refer to: (→ link)

Why don’t you try and get us all excited about a specific artist or artwork from your collection?

This is difficult, as it is difficult to choose one artist or artwork, especially as I am as well a gallery owner, so then of course I also think as a gallerist and wishes to push my artists, so despite saying I try not to be pushy I will push one of my artists; Øystein Aasan (→ link), who just had a solo show opening at la Vitrine (→ link) in Paris. He is a really hard working dedicated artist, the first artist I invited into the gallery, I have known him since he was 19, as we went to foundation school together (my background is being an artist, with a bachelor in Fine Art from Central St Martins in London, I have however completely put to sleep the artist in me) so I have really followed his development as an artist, he has also introduced me to a lot of really great people within the art world as he moved to Berlin before he even finished his studies, and he has been a close friend of me since we first met. He is also the artist I have the most works of in my collection, as I bought works of him before he started selling through galleries and receiving scholarships, because I loved his work, but also to support him so that he could concentrate on his work.

One of those early works I bought of him is “Untitled (mirror) no1″ where he has cut a photograph of a young woman hanging up clothes to dry into rectangular squares and glued them into a grid on a board, with squares of mirror foil in between. When using this technique he spreads the image out, making it larger, but it also makes the viewer try to pin the image back together visually in order to get a sense of what the image is, it plays with proportions, details stays the same size, while other elements are enlarged, like a shirt in this image which is easily read in its expanded version, while the mirror foil takes in the surroundings and integrates it into the work. Øystein has continued working in this manner, but I have a few of his early grid works, which have a somewhat different character than his more recent grid works.

(…)

“Untitled (mirror) no1″

Can you give us three good reasons why becoming a collector is a bad idea?

It can be very expensive. And if you have a habit of impulse shopping, then this can be a financially hazardous addiction.

Space, as your collection grows, you need a place to keep the works. Preferably so that you can see the works on a daily basis, that means bigger flats or houses. Or you need to get a good storage space.

Collecting easily involves travelling to art fairs, biennials, openings etc., these events often involve a lot of partying and big amounts of champagne, thus an unhealthy lifestyle. On the other hand, travelling is so much more fun when you travel with a purpose.

Actually, there is only one reason why collecting is a bad idea, the expenses. But hopefully only the short term financial situation suffers, if you are a collector with a good flair, the value of your collection will rise quicker than the money you put into the collection. Then the question is, when the prices of an artist in your collection goes up; sell or not sell, or are you able to sell? Hopefully your income from your other activities will rise so that you can continue your habit without selling. The works you appreciate the most are likely to be the works whose value rises the most.

What’s the question you wanted me to ask, but I haven’t?

Why are women collectors and artists less noticeable than their male adversaries? Though I am glad you didn’t, as I do not have any good answers to the question.

Of course I would now like your answer or your thoughts about it and would extend it by adding: Why do you think men are more noticeable? And do you think it would be a good idea for women to be more noticeable or should the guys step back?

This is such a difficult question, and I regret I brought it to your attention. First, I do not think men should step back to give space for women, the issue is more complicated than that.

I think the reason for this unbalanced situation is mainly due to structural and historical reasons, besides women normally being the main carer for children. Having young children, especially if you have more than one child, makes it more difficult to travel to fairs, get around to do or see shows, and often a female artist with children seems to disappear for a while after they get children, which again can make it difficult to get back on the forefront of the art scene. The age one normally gets children is also the age when the career might be in its formative stage, when one is still considered young and emerging, all of this makes it difficult to combine a successful career with getting children, especially for women, men seem to get away with it more easily.

And then the majority of collectors are men, I guess partly because men still seem to earn more money than women in general, but I also think men are more likely to have a ‘collecting gene’, not only when it comes to art, it can be old weapons, cars, records, stamps. In my impression women are in general not often collectors in the same way as men can be, men more often want to own. However, I seem to be an exception to this, as I collect hats, shoes (perhaps not very unusual for women) and art.

I remember reading somewhere about women reading both male and female authors to the same extent, while men tend to prefer male authors. I think the same applies for art, men tend to be more interested in the issues male artists are concerned with, so then male artists are more likely to sell their work. And obviously, if one sells work as an artist, one can concentrate more on the studio practice, which again is the key issue for a successful career.

It does however seem to slowly change, more and more female artists are having successful careers. But there is still a long way to go before the art world gives men and women the same opportunities. It would be interesting to see how many successful male and female artists have children, how many have one child, or how many have several children.

Maybe it also has something to do with a craving for power on behalf of the male specimen? Visibility and publicity clearly is a form of power these days … we could discuss this topic at lenght, but this here blog might not be the appropriate arena.

To come to a conclusion somehow: Do you have a question for the next collector?

Why did you buy your first work of art?

Alas! The question I have tried to avoid to ask but that I was obviously interested in anyway! I was hoping that it comes up, and here it is. Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions during youir travels between Oslo/Miami/Paris!

Feel free to comment on this conversation in the comments or the discussion forum at Independent Collectors. Throw in some more questions, I will forward them to Randi every once in a while, if she doesn’t read and answer them automatically.

Picture credits: R. Thommessen

This is Part One of an abbreviated version of the interview. For the full text, please visit the discussion forum at Independent Collectors. (→ link)

Ane Mette Hol (NO) – beautifully made drawn reproductions of objects on paper (→ link).
Øystein Aasan (NO) – see the second part of the interview
Johan Thurfjell (SE) – often narrative works with a touch of sentimentality

Randi Thommessen and me at Art Rotterdam, 2009.

The first question I want to ask you is the one Christian Pfaff came up with in my last conversation:

If your house is on fire and you’ve rescued all the pictures, which one would you put back in the fire because you don’t like it but would want to have the insurance pay for it?

I can’t think of any work I would put back, or, rather the only work that came to my mind is not valuable enough for there being any point in putting it back, it is a painting of by a Norwegian painter, and since I bought it she has more or less disappeared and is forgotten, and what I have managed to find of images of her work shows she has become less and less interesting as an artist. I have a drawing of her as-well, which is the first art work I ever bought, and that I still really like. And actually this painting, it was not me who bought it, but my deceased father who got it as a present for me, though I picked it out myself. So for sentimental reasons, I would still keep it, even though it does no longer excite me.

Not for the fire.

Apart from that, putting a work back in order to get the insurance money, that would be insurance fraud.

This is a very politically correct answer, I’m sure your insurance company appreciates you sticking to the rules ;) And having lured you in on an entertaining question, here is a more serious subject: You are a collector but you also run a gallery, Lautom Contemporary (→ link). Which one came first, which will stay longer and how do you keep the two separated, if at all?

I bought my first art works about 15 years ago, but I would not say I started collecting until a few years back, as it was just a few one off occasions. I did however decide to start collecting art prior to deciding to start a gallery, as I discovered that a lot of art and artists that had really excited me 10 years before, were now successful and well established artists, I sensed that I might have a certain flair for contemporary art. But before I actually started adding to my then tiny collection, I had already decided to start a gallery.

So it’s a bit like the „chicken/egg“ dilemma, isn’t it? Do you also buy from yourself?

Obviously I buy art from my own gallery, but not only, and I see my private collection as separate of the gallery. When artists in my gallery have particularly good pieces, I do take these pieces with me to fairs or make them available for sale in the gallery, even though I really would like the work myself, it is important for the artist and for the gallery to show as good work as possible, I can’t just show the second best and keep the best pieces for myself, but then, if the work in question does not sell, I will not be too disappointed. (…)

And then the last part of the question: Which will stay longer? I hope they will both stay for a very long time. Though I hope to collect until I die, but stop as a gallerist a few years prior.

Untitled (Drawing for Floor), Ane Mette Hol, 2005

Being a collector, is running a gallery an advantage or a disadvantage? How do other collectors react when you hand them your card and they see that you’re a gallery owner as well? Does it put them off?

I can’t really see it being a disadvantage being both, except that you often have to first focus on selling art from your gallery, before you can go hunting for your own collection. On the other hand, you might get easier access to art works, and better prices if you buy from galleries you have a relationship with, and with time you do build relationships with other galleries, as colleagues.

I can’t say I have felt I have put collectors off by telling I am a gallery owner, but I am not a pushy gallerist. (…) When I meet people, I see them as individuals, not as collectors, gallery owners, politicians or other (…). If I communicate well with a person within the arts, then there is a chance we might like similar art and collaborate in some way, but it is up to the collector to check out if he likes what my gallery is showing, and come to me as a collector. (…) That is how I work, so I expect others to function that way too. (…)

Let’s turn to your collection again. Can you tell us a bit about it? Is it “about” something?

No, my collection is not about anything, I buy pieces I like, at least normally within my price range. I feel I buy quite different type of works, though I do see however as my collection is growing, that even though it is not intentional, there is a certain link between the works, and I guess that link is me, and who I am as a person.

If I were to look at your whole collection, taking my time, what do you think would the collection of works tell me about you?

Very difficult, as I am not good at talking about “Who I am”, but then who is?

I think I would seem rather schizophrenic; I have humor and can be quite playful, but I am also rather dry. I can be romantic, and a bit melancholic, but perhaps not very passionate. I have an intellectual strike. I like simplicity, but I am messy (I am not sure one can see this from the collection, but it is true) and I am not very colourful. Maybe I am a bit shy and not the one to search the center of attention, but I am not afraid to show myself.

I am not sure all of this is true about me, some of it I guess is quite to the point, but some of the descriptions I dare say are wrong. And maybe, if you Tommi, were to look at the whole collection, maybe you would find a completely different Randi than I did. So maybe you should look at what I show here at Independent collectors (which is not my whole collection), and tell me who you see?

This one backfired, didn’t it? I would agree on the non-colorful melancholy that manages to transport a certain sense of lightness and humor. Which is indeed a rather strange combination. Probably that’s why I picked you to have a conversation with … You also seem to take things not too serious, which I think is a very good thing and I believe this atmosphere is a basic building block of your collection. At least of the part that I can see.

(End of Part 1)

In the second part, Randi talks about an artists she really likes and I have asked her to give us three good reasons why becoming a collector is a very bad idea.

“Pleased to meet you … ” is a series of conversations I have with other collectors and members of Independent Collectors. These conversations happen via e-mail, skype, phone or in real life and will therefore be a bit different each time. A new conversation will be published every month.

The first conversation was conducted by e-mail with Christian Pfaff from Hamburg, who has spent over 86% of his life as a collector already … and he is just 44 years old at the time of writing!

“To administrate an addiction is not a style.”


Hallo Herr Pfaff, where are you right now?

At the moment I’m sitting on a roof terrace in Kathmandu, Nepal, thinking about my soon ending six months time-out and the return to Hamburg. Every 5 or 6 six years my wife and me use a time of a half year minimum just to recharge and enjoy.

This sounds like a good plan. Has anything shown up on your “art radar” in the places you’ve visited this time? In contrast to your usual dwelling place Hamburg?

Since my travel brought me from Canada and Alaska to Nepal and Thailand, I had the opportunity to meet some artists and visit galleries. I accidentally found a very interesting gallery in Ottawa, Canada, called “Le Petit Mort” (→ link) which is showing contemporary local works not specified in any media. The owner Guy Berube does a fine job bringing an exotic variety of artists together. However, I liked the paperworks of the young upcoming Ottawa artist Graham Robinson who creates lots of his sculptural artworks with cardboard. I bought three of his recent works.

“I don’t buy shares from a soccer club, I’m in for the games!”

I’d be scared to have the works sent to me by mail from Canada. In fact, I even worry when they’re shipped within Germany… aren’t you afraid something could happen to them?

I travel as often as it is possible and of course I’m always looking for art related places and buy art there. Shipping this works sometimes can be really funny and most ends up at the main customs office in Hamburg. I recall receiving a big work on canvas from Asia without receipt. The officers were more interested in the old movie posters I had put in the package to stuff the thing. I’m still waiting for the fragile cardboard works from Canada. So far no sign that they’ve reached anywhere. I’ll pray for a while.

While we keep our fingers crossed that they will arrive unharmed, could you tell us about your style of collecting: Charles Saatchi or Ronnie Biggs?

My style of collecting isn’t either methodical or going for the big catch. Coming from a family with creatively gifted but also neurotic personalities, art always was part of my daily life. My aunts collected reliquaries from catholic saints or created costumes. One even studied with Wilhelm Baumeister. My cousins faked antique furniture or made stamps from little newspaper classified ads. One family member ended up in jail for the forgery of train tickets in the post WW2-time. It’s no wonder that I started collecting art (and doing art by myself) very early. But my access to the art world is a very direct one: I collect what I like. I don’t care for big names or the show. I appreciate the whole picture, meaning I like to meet the artist, I like to know more about his works, his opinions and about him- or herself. Investment and stockbrokership is definitely not my cup of tea. It never was. And even now with a nice little collection the thrill doesn’t come from the gain of worth of the one or the other piece, but the story every picture tells. Back to the question: I was never a strategic collector in the way Saatchi did it. This way of administrating an addiction is not my style. The Biggs Thing – preparing for the one and only chance – is neither my approach. Why wait for only one artist or even one work?

“Does the work evoke feelings, does the artist? That’s what we are talking about.”

Since you mention thrill, I just cut in here quickly, if I may. The thrill in collecting, how much of it is coming from the nightly walks you take around town, when you are armed with … well, what are you armed with? I heard some interesting stories about that from you in Berlin a while back.

The thrill about collecting is not about buying, even if i must confess that it gives me sometimes a kick to see the red dot. I like good concepts, interesting ideas, craftsmanship and most important a authentic attitude from the artist or the work. I like humor in this sometimes so bureaucratic and stiff intellectual scene. Off course there’s also a „hunting part“. Walk through studios, art spaces – looking for a good catch, looking for an eye-opener or even for a good laugh. I appreciate that very much. Since i’m also in interested in the off-side like street-arts i sometimes stroll at night through the streets looking for the newest, coolest stickers, tiles, tags and whatever – try to scratch, cut or peel them of or find out what the next big thing of 56K or other guerrilla artists is. I can remember doing it by myself ages ago, so it’s both, fun and thrill…

You seem to rather not talk about the saw (or do I just think you mentioned a saw?), so let’s talk about some of your favorite artists from your collection… name three:

4000 (Thomas Egeler), Hamburg, Germany – unbelievable
Christian Junghanns, Hannover, Germany – my pop art revolutionary
Andy Warhol, still – I love the shoe drawings he did in the NY Times


////

… PART 2 can be found in the Independent Collectors discussion forum, where you’ll find out why Pfaff is collecting “4000″ instead of Jonathan Meese, how the glamorous part of the art world compares to his own, what the question was that I haven’t asked him, and some more.

////


And since I don’t want to leave you with such a stub, here is PART 3 of the interview …

Talking about personal and emotional attachment to artworks … Imagine your house is on fire and you can rescue just one piece from your collection. Which one and why?

The question which piece of art I would rescue from my collection in case of the big fire somehow reminds me of that long unnerving trial I had to undergo to be allowed to do the social service instead of the military duty: “Would you shoot a terrorist who’s trying to kill all kids in a kinder garden?”. Usually it’s not about the final answer but about the way you got to it … It’s really hard to decide: the Picasso or the first drawing of my son? More than about every single artwork I think about my diverse collection as a whole. Still, there’s one work I really appreciated for the last twenty years or so. It is a small still life by 4000. That little piece of shitty wood was just perfectly right at the time it was painted. It shows simple things: a bottle, an apple,a table, a small book, no more no less – acrylic, black and white. The splintered piece was given to me by the artist in a melodramatic situation at an early grey Hamburg morning after a furious opening. It’s an artwork perfectly made for me. I changed the hangings in my house constantly for the last decades. The still life stayed.

I could keep this going but I have been intruding in your holiday long enough … to finish off, do you have a question for the next collector?

If your house is on fire and you’ve rescued all the pictures, which one would you put back in the fire because you don’t like it but would want to have the insurance pay for it?


This is a great question!Thank you Christian for your time, your stories and your pictures!


Feel free to comment on this conversation in the comments or the discussion forum at Independent Collectors. Throw in some more questions, I will forward them to Christian every once in a while, if he doesn’t read and answer them automatically.

Picture credits: lottegandaki