I want a share another small painting of a cactus in a flower pot at the Arequipa Convent of Santa Catalina in Arequipa, Peru. I particulary like this piece, the brushmarks and light within the piece.

I took 4 paintings to local art venue here in Hampden called the Antreasion Gallery. My work will represented by the gallery. Since the agreement is binded by a contract, I have to continue to produce work and later have a bigger show. And the owner is up to showing some of my other works that aren't related to my fragmented pixelation series. In Seattle, I was very active in non-profit gallery that took a low commission. The gallery was non-juried or censored so there is always an eclectic mix of work. I also displayed my work in alternative art-friendly venues such as coffee shops. I always priced my work on what I wanted from the piece in financial terms.

Most galleries take a standard commission of 50%, and you have to keep in mind that the work are agreeing to display in the gallery will be bound for a period of time after you take the work down. So suppose I make a sale out of my studio of a painting piece that once hung, but is no longer on display at the gallery . If the date of the sale falls within a time frame the gallery has rights to the piece, then artist is obligated to pay the commission to the gallery. So in effect, the relationship between the artist and gallery should be mutual beneficial The gallery exposes your work and works to get it known - you in turn have to adhere to gallery contractual terms. And now I get to say my work is being represented by the gallery. Sounds all profesh. :)