Comments on: Big Artist Website Mistake #5 – Poor Quality Bio

By: Latifah Shay

Latifah Shay — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:11:09 +0000

Thanks for these excellent examples. I wasn’t planning on re-writing my bio, but not you’ve got me thinking…

By: Daniel

Daniel — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:59:17 +0000

Moshe,
I think that’s just fine to have it on the same page for now. It’s always a challenge to build a resume and I think combining it in the bio is a good idea to get started. Much better than a resume that has only a couple of lines! …. Daniel.

By: Moshe Mikanovsky

Moshe Mikanovsky — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:18:44 +0000

Thanks Daniel,

In my site I have my education/exhibits/awards/achievements in the same bio page, mainly because I am just starting, and so its not so long or big…. Any recommandations for that?

Thanks
Moshe

By: Isaac

Isaac — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:36:39 +0000

I like the Rick Clarence bio in the picture. Its kind of like mine. If I write anything more than that I feel like I’m spewing out boring garbage that no one wants to read.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:59:16 +0000

Good comments Viridis and Moche.

It’s useful to think of a good artist website as the result of a great recipe – the “combination of everything” as Moche so nicely described it. Ideally you are trying to bake a cake which will appeal to the largest body of potential arts buyers and professionals. If you’re missing an ingredient the cake might still turn out OK – but the taste might not appeal to a whole segment of potential buyers.

So – why would you do that when you don’t have to?

I understand Viridis that some art buyers don’t focus on the artist – but many do – so don’t exclude them!

Your point about a blog being a better place to understand the artist and their story is very true – I think artist blogs when well-done are tremendous.

But think of the bio page as being the “30 second elevator pitch” which gets the attention – while the blog is the bigger picture for a visitor who is ready for more.

Moche – your question about where education/exhibits/awards/achievements should go. Traditionally they would go into a separate section and be called the “Artist Resume”. Some artists combine them with a bio but I personally think it’s better to keep them separate. you will get different viewpoints on that question for sure.

Thanks again for the comments.

By: Moshe Mikanovsky

Moshe Mikanovsky — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:20:32 +0000

A picture is worth 1000 words?
I agree that a good bio is important, but at the end of the day it is the combination of everything. The artist’s blog has much more space (both in characters and in time) to tell the story, one bit at a time, but the bio should give the first impression, aerial glimpse, to entice for more.
One thing I wondered is regarding the education/exhibits/awards/achievements etc. Is that part of the bio or does it require its own section?

By: Viridis

Viridis — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 14:24:35 +0000

Hm. I’m not sure if I agree with this, at least not completely. It may simply be my own bias, but I am several times more likely to remember the art work rather than the artist– in fact, whether I find work via a website or browsing at an art fair, the likelihood is that I won’t remember the artist’s name at all, but rather “oh, it was the guy who painted still lifes with apples staged in a war.” It’s nothing personal against the artists, of course, I’m just really terrible at names, and much better at remembering images.

To that extent, an artist bio is not going to do much for me one way or another. I will pay attention to an artist’s background only if I am truly impressed by their work… and in that case, I’d rather see if they have a blog where I can follow them more closely, rather than just a small bio.