Back

WYWH: 2024 CPAL Conference

July 8, 2024

A speaker at a podium and four seated panelists, from the 2024 CPAL Conference, in front of an audience.

By Damla Karabay and Helen Boone

Established in 2020, in New York, the Center for the Preservation of Artists’ Legacies (CPAL) is a non-profit organization conducting research and organizing events on preservation, conservation, legacy stewardship, and research on conditions impacting artists. CPAL aims to address legacy challenges facing contemporary visual artists and their life’s work, especially those who are under-known or less financially endowed yet have made significant contributions to the visual historical-cultural continuum. The organization seeks to devise cross-disciplinary solutions to modern issues facing artists in their legal planning.

From June 3-5th 2024, CPAL hosted their annual conference, which members of the Center for Art Law Summer Team had the pleasure to attend. This article offers key takeaways from the event and highlights upcoming events of our own that intersect with those of the CPAL conference.

Day 1: The Artwork

The first day of the conference explored the multifaceted challenges associated with the storage and ownership of artworks from a legacy management perspective. It delved into both the tangible and intangible aspects of housing artworks and provided strategies for optimizing storage, managing copyrights, and addressing legal issues. Special attention was given to handling artworks across various mediums.

Panel 1:

The first panel considered the issues of art storage and physical storage of works. It was moderated by Joy Glidden, the Founding Director of CPAL. The speakers included Francis Greenburger, Founder and Co-Curator at Art Omi Pavilions; Cameron Sterling, Content Advisor for Individuals and Organizations; Lia Gangitano, Executive Director of Participant Inc.; and Alice Aycock, artist and a sculptor. This panel discussed the critical and often overlooked issue of physical storage in the art world, aptly titled “The Elephant in the Room: You Can’t Keep it All!” The discussion centered around the tangible challenges of storing artworks, emphasizing the need for efficient and strategic storage solutions.

The panel began by addressing the basic logistical challenges of physical storage, such as the limited space available for housing artworks, the necessity of climate control to preserve the integrity of various mediums, and the financial burden associated with maintaining proper storage facilities. The speakers highlighted that, despite these challenges, effective storage is crucial for the preservation of art and the protection of its value. One of the questions that came up during this session was related to alternative and non-traditional spaces for storing artworks. Cameron Sterling, provided valuable insights on this topic including storage of art in educational institutions. He mentioned how educational institutions can offer unique opportunities for both storage and display, integrating artworks into learning environments. Sterling emphasized the potential of such spaces to alleviate the pressures of traditional storage facilities while also promoting public engagement with the artworks.

Panel 2:

The second panel was on the digitization of storage, considering database systems and vintage mediums. It was moderated by Nicholas Martin, a curator for the Arts & Humanities at NYU Special Collections. The panelists were Katie Carey, Head of Growth at Artwork Archives; Mary Engel, Founder and Director at APAG and the Director of Orkin/Engel Film and Photo Archive; and Carol Parkinson, Executive Director at Harvestworks.

This panel focused on the digitization and selective archival of artworks, exploring the transition from traditional storage methods to digital solutions. Titled “Database Systems and Vintage Mediums,” the discussion delved into the various aspects of digitizing archives, the challenges encountered during this process, and the databases best suited for managing digital art collections.

The panel began by highlighting the significant changes brought about by the digitization of archives. Digitization not only enhances the accessibility and preservation of artworks but also allows for more efficient management and retrieval of information. However, the transition from traditional physical storage to digital archives presents its own set of challenges, including the need for robust digital infrastructure, the risk of data degradation over time, and the necessity of regular updates and backups.

Speakers discussed the critical considerations when selecting a database for digital archives. Factors such as user-friendliness, scalability, security, and the ability to handle various file formats were emphasized. The panelists shared their experiences with different database systems, providing insights into their advantages and limitations.

The panel also addressed the preservation of vintage mediums in a digital format. This includes ensuring that digital copies accurately capture the essence and details of the original works. The speakers discussed the techniques and technologies available for high-quality digitization, as well as the ethical considerations involved in reproducing artworks digitally.

During the Q&A session, audience members posed several insightful questions. One attendee inquired about the long-term sustainability of digital archives and the measures that can be taken to mitigate risks such as data loss or technological obsolescence. This led to a discussion on the importance of maintaining multiple backups and utilizing cloud storage solutions.

Following this, there was a special presentation given by Katie Carey, Head of Growth at Artwork Archives. Carey showcased the features and benefits of using the Artwork Archive database for managing art collections. She demonstrated how the platform facilitates the organization, documentation, and preservation of artworks through the interface. Carey highlighted the importance of having a centralized system for managing digital archives, which allows for better tracking of provenance, exhibition history, and other critical information. She also touched on the platform’s ability to generate reports and analytics, aiding in strategic decision-making for artists, collectors, and institutions.

Panel 3:

The third panel focused on the complexities of transferring ownership of artworks, with a particular emphasis on the accompanying challenges related to copyrights. The discussion provided a thorough examination of the legal intricacies and considerations involved when artworks change hands. Attorney Amelia Brankov of Brankov PLLC NYC Arts and Media Law Firm served as the moderator. The panel consisted of Sarah Kirk Hanley, Independent Curator, critic, and expert Appraiser; Katarina Feder, Business Development VP at Artists Rights Society and the Co-founder of Arsnl Art; and Saul Ostrow, Consultant to the Bobby Anspach Studios Foundation.

The panel began by outlining the fundamental principles of transferring ownership. When an artwork is sold or otherwise transferred, a complex set of legal and administrative processes must be navigated to ensure a smooth transition. This includes the transfer of title, updating records, and ensuring that all parties are in agreement regarding the terms of the transfer. A significant portion of the discussion was dedicated to the role of copyrights in the transfer of ownership. The panelists emphasized that owning a physical artwork does not necessarily grant the owner copyright over the work. Copyrights often remain with the artist or their estate, unless explicitly transferred through a separate legal agreement. This distinction is crucial, as it affects the new owner’s rights to reproduce, display, or create derivative works. The panelists discussed various scenarios and provided examples of how copyright issues can complicate ownership transfers.

Another key topic was the appraisal of artworks, which is essential for determining their value during a transfer. Accurate appraisals require expertise and an understanding of the current art market. The panelists highlighted the importance of using qualified appraisers and detailed the methodologies used in appraising artworks. They also discussed the factors that can influence an artwork’s value, such as provenance, condition, and historical significance. The speakers shared insights into the practical challenges that can arise during ownership transfers. These challenges include the verification of authenticity, the negotiation of terms, and the potential for disputes between buyers and sellers. The panelists provided strategies for mitigating these issues, such as conducting thorough due diligence, drafting clear contracts, and seeking legal advice when necessary.

Day 2: The Archives

Second day included considerations of institutional and private archives, accessibility and inclusivity practices in archives, and different case studies. The panels together created a cohesive idea of the problems in archiving. While the first panel mentioned overarching issues and historical contingencies, the second panel focused on certain minority groups, and the third panel introduced case studies substantiating and contextualizing the topics discussed.

Panel 1: Institutional and Private Archives

This panel was moderated by Dan Cameron, an independent curator. The panelists were Dr. Brittany Webb, the Evelyn and Will Kaplan Curator of Twentieth-Century Art and the John Rhoden Collection at PAFA; Kyle Croft, Executive Director at New York-based organization Visual AIDS; and Kenta Murakami, Director of Tribeca-based gallery Ortuzar Projects, dedicated to promoting artists who have played a significant role in the development of 20th and 21st-century art but have not received critical exposure in New York.

During the panel, the panelists discussed how to manage the material leftovers of an artist’s life. The archive is often considered a part of the work: “the paper trail” which, while not having monetary value in and of themselves, are the materials that connect the lines in explaining the artist’s life and work. To that end, the panelists reminded everyone that nothing should be thrown away until everything is examined; it is never clear which items will be relevant in the larger context of the collection.

Dr. Webb spoke about the ecosystem of interest in an artist, which is generated by activities of research and the value accorded within the market. The mere existence of an archive is not enough. To generate more traction about an artist, there must be commercial exhibitions and a presence in the market. Hence, there is an everlasting need to think holistically: is the archive set up really well but without the market in mind – or vice versa?

Kyle Croft explained that Visual AIDS’ mission was to preserve the legacies of artists lost to AIDS and those living with AIDS. Historically, the organization was founded in 1988 to use the prestige of the art world to draw attention to the AIDS crisis. They currently have around a thousand artists online and preserve the physical archives of approximately six hundred artists. Working in a specifically cause-focused organization, Croft mentioned that in the longer term, it can help to consider how the specific artist fits in a greater scope: how they fit into their time, what community they represent… This was further expanded on in the second panel of the day (see below).

Perhaps the greatest challenge considered in this panel was the loss of stories and context for artists’ work due to a lack of archiving. Webb emphasized that a lost history is a choice, and there must be more emphasis placed on archiving practices to help the market discover and sustain artists in an industry that does tend to have its favorites. The Center’s participant asked a question of how to practically attain the resources and traction needed to archive such forgotten artists. Dr. Webb and other panelists emphasized the importance of students pursuing novel research and project topics for academia.

Panel 2: Inclusionary Practices – Accessibility & Considerations for Best Practices

This panel was moderated by Dr. Ferris Olin, the Founder of the Institute for Women and Art. The panel was composed of Nicholas Martin, curator for the Arts & Humanities at NYU Special Collections; Sur Rodney (Sur), writer, curator, archivist co-executor of the Geoffrey Hendricks Estate; and Heather Gendron, director of the Robert B. Haas Family Arts Library at Yale University. The second panel was a perfect follow-up from the first panel, featuring archivists instead of curators, and hence illustrating more about the practical process of archiving. The panelists highlighted the disparity between the existence and accessibility of archives. They introduced some practical questions that archivists face, like valuing how much more a researcher benefits from seeing the actual 3-dimensional object as opposed to its photo documentation. They also shared some peculiar moments they faced, like finding a jar with sperm from an artist, and deciding whether to keep it or to dispose of it.

In response to a question from an artist in the audience, the panelists offered advice to those looking to get their art accepted to archive institutions. They highlighted how the artist should explain what their art is rather than what it is about. For example: “A queer artist working in … area in … era”. This remark is also supported by Croft’s comments in the earlier panel. Heather Gendron, the director of the Robert B. Haas Family Arts Library at Yale University, mentioned that Yale (like many other institutions of its kind) was working on amplifying voices that do not have a place in their collections yet. Hence, this kind of more factual and methodical approach can appeal to these institutions, essentially making their jobs easier.

Panel 3: Artist-Constructed Archives – Case Studies

The final panel of the day focused on three different case studies in three different mediums. One case study was of Rena Segal, an artist herself, who is the daughter of George Segal. She archives and stores all of her own and her father’s artworks in their family home, where she continues to reside. Researchers and those interested can visit the house and look at the archives. Another case study was of Martha Wilson, an artist and the Founding Director of the Franklin Furnace Archive, Inc. She told the audience about her experiences with building and eventually selling a book archive to MoMA. Lastly, the final case study was of Essye Klempner, Director of Programs & Partnerships at the EFA Robert Blackburn Printmaking Workshop. She spoke of the history of the institution and their experiences to date.

An interesting story on insurance told in passing by Martha Wilson, was of someone throwing a rock into a gallery, hitting and damaging a piece by Jenny Holzer. The truism written on the exact spot where the rock hit the artwork read: “Boredom makes you do crazy things.”

Day 3: The Assets

How do foundations, family members, dealers, and lawyers address the entirety of an artist’s output and assets in order to develop and continue the legacy?

Panel 1: The Critical Year – When the Tax Axe Falls

Moderated by accomplished art lawyer, Amelia Brankov, the first panel of the day discussed the insurance, appraisal, and tax issues each artists’ trustee must face when managing an estate. Sarah Kirk Hanley, an expert appraiser for fine art prints, spoke to the different values prescribed to a collection based on the type of evaluation done, e.g., the Retail Replacement Value, Marketable Cash Value, and Fair Market Value. Christopher Wise, Vice President of Risk Strategies Company and fine arts specialist, emphasized the responsibility of artists and their trustees to provide a complete list of pieces with values and proof that the art is stored in a physically safe location to purchase fine arts insurance. The final panelist, Caryn B. Keppler, Principal in Offit Kurman’s Estate and Trusts Practice Group, provided invaluable information about artist estate tax and how artists can plan to liquidate assets to prepare for payment. Each speaker stressed the need for artists to begin planning and communicating their estate preferences while they are still working.

Panel 2: Executors of Estates – Family members and Outside Expert

In the second panel, Susan Reynolds, the Executive Director of The Milton Resnick and Pat Passlof Foundation, moderated an insightful discussion between speakers Magie Wright, Director of the Easton Foundation; John Crawford, artist and Manager of Ralston Crawford’s Estate; and Diedra Harris-Kelley, Co-Director of the Romare Bearden Foundation. Each panelist echoed the plea for artists to document the number, location, and value of their work as they create it. Harris-Kelley shared how her foundation has spent decades cataloging Bearden’s work since there was no record when they began.

Panel 3: Strategies for Managing Assets, Legacy, and Succession

The final panel of the conference featured Lissa McClure, Executive Director of the Woodman Family Foundation; Christopher Wise, Vice President of Risk Strategies Company and fine arts specialist; Sur Rodney (Sur), writer, curator, and archivist managing Geoffery Hendricks’ estate; and moderator Christina Hunter, Executive Director of the Nancy Graves Foundation. The speakers discussed the creativity required to promote an artist’s work after they have passed. McClure recommended connecting with university galleries and engaging with contemporary scholarship to increase exposure. Finally, each speaker continued to remind attendees that a collection is more valuable when it is cataloged.

Post-event: In conversation with Dr Brittany Webb

Following the Conference, Center for Art Law reached out to Dr Brittany Webb with a few follow up questions to further explore means of preventing lost histories through archives. The main takeaway of this call was that any and all initiatives are welcome in the archive business, and that something is better than nothing. At the end of the day, initiative brings about increased interaction which in turn supports the core of the archive project, which is to support research and strengthen the existing information database.

Discussing how a late artist’s work might be preserved, Dr Webb elaborated on the case study of the John Roden estate, archived by PAFA. While doing so, she mentioned two primary pieces of advice that she would extend to artists/executors of a late artist’s estate looking for an institution to take on their archives. The first advice is to look through certain archives (especially the Smithsonian, as they have an extensive collection) and seek out existing archives on the artist or their work. In the context of the Roden Project, it was the case that the Smithsonian had archives of John Roden’s past papers, which significantly strengthened the successful grant applications made for the project. The second piece of advice was that the archive process is essentially rooted in institutional matchmaking. Fit is crucial when seeking out institutions to take on one’s archives, and the artist must think of several factors of the institution such as their mission, location, audience, accessibility, and size. Hence, although the biggest institutions might seem appealing initially, they might not be a good call in increasing accessibility and research capacity in relation to the artists’ estate. An artist and/or their work might have unique qualities (non-traditional materials, geography, particular place/era, style etc.) that are specifically sought out by an institution and matches their mission.

Dr Webb told us a captivating story about the reach and power of public (and especially online) archives. For the Roden Project, it made a significant difference that the NEH grant they received was not just to create the archives of John Roden but to transfer them online. In two instances, international researchers reached out to PAFA on the basis of the online database. In one of these instances, artist Ameer Sedart contacted PAFA through instagram and then through email to inform them that he knew the exact location of John’s photographs in Indonesia. With his insight, the team was able to fill in information they did not have prior access to. In archiving, specific locations are extremely helpful as it proves helpful for researchers’ purposes. He also clarified that some of the photographs included students from the Institute of Ban Dong, and hence it was discovered that Roden was in Indonesia not just for research, but to teach and train young artists as well. Publicizing the archives online indirectly led to a new dimension being added to Roden’s archives, and a better understanding of his life and work being created. The conversations between Sedart and PAFA were facilitated through google translate, as neither side spoke the others’ language fluently. Dr Webb highlighted that having such a conversation would not have been possible twenty years ago, which goes to show how much technology can be revolutionary in artists’ archives and related research endeavors.

Conclusion

CPAL’s Annual Conference on Preserving Artists’ Legacies offered in-depth insights into estate planning for artists. Each speaker offered their unique expertise on topics ranging from tax compliance to archiving strategies. The anecdotes they shared were at times shocking and at times relatable to many of the attendees. Artists and trustees could benefit from their wisdom regardless of the monetary value of their collection. The conference perfectly balanced providing practical advice and discussing broader themes surrounding artists’ legacies. CPAL offered a nuanced guide to some of the relevant complexities facing this dynamic and cross-disciplinary subject. Speakers multiple times reminded that artists should compile a complete catalogue of their work!

Following up from the contents of the CPAL Conference, it is relevant to mention some events that the Center for Art Law recently hosted. On June 11, 2024, the Center hosted a panel on Posthumous Art & Copyright with Sharon Hecker, Peter J. Karol, Eva E. Subotnik and Guy A. Rub, discussing legal and art historical perspectives on whether artists’ rights should be extended posthumously. The Center also hosted an Artist Legacy & Estate Planning Clinic with keynote speaker Elizabeth Devolder discussing how to decide one’s power of attorney and executor of estate in possible situations where the individual is incapacitated, dead, or in need of long-term care. She highlighted the importance of this especially when it comes to healthcare decisions, financial/practical affairs, and electing who should benefit from an artist’s work. She precautioned that default documents for these decisions usually don’t include IP and copyright issues, which is especially crucial for artists’ estates. After the keynote, artists were paired for confidential one-on-one consultations to understand their estate and legacy planning needs and formalize next steps for their individual processes. The recordings of these events are accessible through Premium Membership with the Center for Art Law.

Wish You Were Here: Professor Weller’s Introduction of the New Court of Arbitration for Nazi-Looted Cultural Property

WYWH: “Art Lawyering Bootcamp: Copyright Law”

WYWH: The Association for Research into Crimes Against Art’s 15th annual Amelia Conference on Art Crime