I often find that an aura of mystery surrounds artistic editions, as some collectors—and the general public at large—do not fully understand their artistic merit. Editions are often misunderstood as lacking artistic or monetary value, largely due to misconceptions about the role of multiplicity, their production methods, and the theoretical frameworks that inform them.

Editions are definitely not new to the art world nor the market, but we are witnessing an increasing presence of them. Many artists intentionally create works in multiples—some identical, others with slight variations—through a process known as creating an edition. These artworks are produced by, or under the direct supervision of, the artist, typically through printmaking (such as prints and photographs) or casting (for sculptures), resulting in a controlled series of impressions or sculptures.

For example, in sculpture, an artist may create a model to be cast in bronze, resin, or other materials, and a set number of casts is produced. Similarly, in printmaking—such as etching, lithography, woodcut, or screen printing—the artist designs and often works directly on the printing matrix (e.g., plate, stone, or screen), and each print is pulled from this matrix as part of a limited and controlled edition.

When prints and sculptures are conceived as multiples from the outset—as part of the artist’s creative vision—each piece in the edition is considered an original artwork in its own right.

Reproductions and multiples

That said, original fine art editions differ significantly from reproductions, which are often mistakenly perceived as the same. Reproductions, in contrast to editions, are not original works of art but are mechanical or digital copies of preexisting artworks, such as paintings, drawings, or sculptures. A reproduction can be a print of a painting or a miniature version of a sculpture, typically serving the commercial mass market as merchandise or decorative objects.

Thus, reproductions do not have the same artistic or monetary significance as original editions or the original artworks from which they draw.

Multiples, on the other hand, are a category that emerged in the mid-20th century with the rise of Conceptual Art and Pop Art and are often presented alongside editions in auction sales.

Multiples are deliberately produced to exist in multiple instances and are conceived by the artists as original artworks. As such, all fine art editions are considered part of the broader category of multiples, but not all multiples are editions.

Multiples represent a broader category that includes three-dimensional objects that extend beyond traditional sculptural processes, often utilizing industrial techniques and a variety of media.

Therefore, the main distinction between editions and multiples lies in their conceptual and material scope: while the production of editions emphasizes traditional fine art concepts such as authenticity, authorship, and controlled production, multiples go beyond, encompassing a broader spectrum of reproducible works.

The market

It has been observed that since 2023, lower-priced artworks are performing relatively better than high-value lots in the secondary market. The Art Basel and UBS Global Art Market Report 2025 indicates that while the value of overall sales has declined by 12% in 2024, the number of total transactions increased by 3%, largely driven by sales of works under $50,000. 1

Furthermore, auction data indicates a decline in the presentation of high-value and high-quality works, suggesting increased caution among sellers. Notably, the number of works sold at auction for over $10 million fell by 27% in 2023 and by a staggering 39% in 2024. 2 In parallel, major lots are more frequently being sold privately rather than through public auctions. This reflects the broader financial and social uncertainty affecting both the art world and the global economy, as well as a growing interest in emerging artists, particularly among younger collectors.

Amid these shifts, and in response to evolving market dynamics, editioned works are gaining increased prominence as an accessible entry point for a new generation of collectors and expanding collector profiles. Their generally lower price point not only attracts new buyers but also helps mitigate risk for sellers in an uncertain market.

At the same time, there is a growing demand among buyers and artists alike for the democratization of the market through greater transparency and accessibility. Within this context, the increased presence of editioned works—especially at fairs and gallery exhibitions—may indicate the market’s effort to adapt to this ongoing uncertainty and to accommodate new emerging patterns of collecting.

There are several important considerations that influence an edition's market value. One of them is scarcity. Beyond provenance and exhibition history—which are always critical and relevant, especially when buying from the secondary market—it is also essential to consider whether the fine art edition is limited or open and the number of impressions or casts in the edition.

The term limited edition refers to works that are part of an edition intended to be produced in a predetermined number of impressions or casts. The total number of impressions or casts is determined by the artist, and is often guided by national regulations. In some countries, such as France and the UK, there are legal limits on the number of editions allowed for a work to qualify as fine art, particularly for tax and customs purposes. Ensuring that each piece is properly numbered confirms that a transparent and regulated system is in place, which reinforces both the work’s legitimacy and its market credibility.

An open or unlimited edition, on the other hand, refers to works that are typically produced according to demand, without numbering or a predetermined limit on the number of impressions or casts. These works are generally valued lower due to their lack of scarcity.

Nonetheless, works by more established or highly sought-after artists may still command high prices, even when they belong to open or unnumbered editions. This is closely linked to the artist’s reputation and market performance, but also to their general practice. An artist’s decision to produce open or unnumbered editions can be a deliberate conceptual choice, integral to their overall oeuvre and reflective of their artistic philosophy.

An example is the prominent Brazilian artist Cildo Meireles (b. 1948, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), whose practice includes the production of open or unnumbered editions and multiples. This approach is a conceptual strategy that prioritizes the circulation, accessibility, and public engagement of art over the market’s emphasis on exclusivity and collectability. Works such as Zero Dollar (1978/1984) 3—an unnumbered series of offset lithographs that mimic the format of U.S. currency, altered to display a denomination of zero—directly challenge conventional notions of uniqueness and value, concepts often closely tied to market perception. By elevating the conceptual over the material, Zero Dollar questions the very structures that define worth within the art world and the general financial system.

In this case, the lack of a fixed edition size or numbering does not diminish the work’s value or artistic merit—quite the contrary. The unlimited and unnumbered format is an essential part of the ideological message that Meireles wants to convey, reinforcing the work’s conceptual framework.

In addition, it is important to consider whether the edition is signed by the artist. A hand-signed edition is often perceived by collectors as having a closer connection to the artist, thus increasing its desirability and market value. In some cases, such as with prints, works signed only in the plate tend to be priced lower, unless this approach is typical for the artist. In the case of sculptures, a full signature may not always be physically feasible and is often replaced by foundry stamps or the artist’s monogram.

Another key factor is whether the edition was produced before or after the artist’s death. Editions created during an artist's lifetime are usually more valuable than posthumous editions. In the case of posthumous editions, it is important to determine who produced the edition and whether it was created according to the artist’s prior instructions or under the supervision of a recognized foundation, estate, or institution with the legal and moral authority to act on the artist’s behalf.

For example, Auguste Rodin's sculptures were cast in multiple editions. Some were authorized during his lifetime, and others were made posthumously under the supervision of the Musée Rodin in Paris. This institution, established by Rodin's will, holds the legal and moral rights to his works. Regardless of the artist's passing, the Musée Rodin’s authority legitimizes these sculptures, which are therefore considered authentic.

Furthermore, one must pay attention to the work’s quality and condition—its preservation, as well as the type and extent of any conservation interventions. In the case of prints, for example, this includes factors such as paper quality and the work’s physical state, including signs of humidity, tears and creases, stains or discoloration, insect damage such as flyspecks, and other forms of deterioration. Similarly, for sculptures, condition indicators include scratches, abrasions, dents, chips, and other surface or structural issues.

The myths

With editions come a number of persistent myths. The three most common concern the concept of originality, the perceived link between value and edition number, and the assumption that smaller edition sizes inherently imply greater value.

Artworks are often thought of as unique, one-of-a-kind creations. A common misconception is that originality is synonymous with singularity—that a work must exist as only one to be considered original. However, in the case of editions, each piece in the series is regarded as an original artwork in its own right—not a copy of the first impression or cast, nor a reproduction of a pre-existing work.

In my view, this idea stems from persistent social attitudes that place a high premium on exclusivity. The pursuit of the "best" is often closely linked to the idea of uniqueness—of owning something no one else possesses. This mindset extends into collecting practices, where uniqueness is frequently equated with greater value, reinforcing a preference for one-of-a-kind works over multiples or editions, regardless of their artistic legitimacy. As a result, the concept of originality has become closely tied to this narrow interpretation of uniqueness, with the two terms often used interchangeably.

In terms of numbering, there is a common misconception that the first numbers in all types of contemporary editions are always the most valuable. This is generally untrue, though there are important exceptions. For example, in traditional woodcut printing, the block can degrade slightly with each impression, making earlier prints often crisper and more detailed. While modern practices involving hardened or treated blocks and careful inking techniques have increased consistency, the matrix may still change subtly over time. In such cases, collectors may show greater interest in earlier impressions.

However, in screenprints, lithographs, etchings, and digital prints, edition numbers typically do not reflect print quality. Modern printing technologies ensure a high level of consistency, and the numbering usually serves only to indicate sequence. In fact, the opposite can sometimes occur: when a series becomes highly desirable, the final remaining prints in the edition may command higher prices due to increased demand and limited availability.

Another persistent myth is that larger editions are inherently less valuable than smaller ones. In reality, this is highly relative. Value is determined not solely by scarcity but also by factors such as the artist’s reputation, market demand, and the broader context in which the work is circulated. A large edition by a well-established artist may still command high prices, while a small edition by an unknown artist will possibly struggle in the market, regardless of its limited size.

Ultimately, everything in art is relative, and context matters. Each edition must be understood within its specific artistic, cultural, and market framework—there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all approach. Still, the growing prominence of editions is an exciting development, especially at a time when the art world is undergoing significant transformation. Whether these changes prove to be positive or not remains to be seen, but the momentum and the shift in perception are undeniable.

References

1 Art Basel and UBS Global Art Market Report, Arts Economics, 2025.
2 Ibid.
3 Cildo Meireles, Zero Dollar, 1978-1984, offset lithograph, 6.8 cm x 15.7 cm. This work is part of the series Árvore do dinheiro (Money Tree, 1969), in which Meireles criticizes and explores the relationship between symbolic value, real value, and exchange value. According to the artist, “The idea was to produce an object and then try to put this object into circulation, which causes the object to provoke a kind of shift in anthropological behavior.”