It's like anything it's only worth what people will pay for it. There's a picture taken of the Rhine,so they say,that to me looked like 3 or 4 lines and that just sold at austion for over 3 million plus I seem to remember.Just Google 10 most expensive pictures sold
The price is always high when it comes to 'art'. Painting more so than photographs as they cannot be reproduced when a photograph can (and I do not mean printing many).
Painting are an investments, a bet that it will not lose value (it helps if the guy is dead) and can be sold later on at a profit.
This is not something one can afford on UHH so (you never know thought) so there is very little else to say.
As to be painter vs photographer? We are world apart despite what some will claim. Artists? Ah! Don't get me started as to what an 'artist' is, I might pee on your shoe!!! :shock: :oops: :mrgreen: :lol: :lol:
MisterWilson wrote:
So, what do you think? Is that painting worth that amount of money?
It is a very influential artwork. That's the main reason it is so desirable among collectors and why it fetches such a high price.
Shoot an image that will influence future generations of photographers and have a huge impact on the history of photography, and perhaps it too will sell at an auction for an astronomical figure someday.
Sure, the price is high because the artist is DEAD! It is a sort of joke between living artists that you have to be deceased in order to command a big price for your work. "Dead, rich artist!" Who benefits, all but the artist. Whether or not you like the piece, it remains the same. Think of Van Gogh. Did he garner any sales of his art when he was alive? I am a 'living artist' responding here. No one buys this stuff for the art but as an "investment" and on speculation. It's quite a conundrum when you consider the entire art scene.
We may never know the price of the most expensive photograph if it was used in a blackmail scheme. Just thinking...
First, I am a Conservative. There is no way in Hell that this so called painting or any other is WORTH that amount of money.
However, if someone has that amount of money to invest then go for it. I do question their mentality.
I do like it as a preliminary sketch to what will be a final painting.
pixelmaven wrote:
Sure, the price is high because the artist is DEAD! It is a sort of joke between living artists that you have to be deceased in order to command a big price for your work. "Dead, rich artist!" Who benefits, all but the artist. Whether or not you like the piece, it remains the same. Think of Van Gogh. Did he garner any sales of his art when he was alive? I am a 'living artist' responding here. No one buys this stuff for the art but as an "investment" and on speculation. It's quite a conundrum when you consider the entire art scene.
Sure, the price is high because the artist is DEAD... (
show quote)
This is somewhat inaccurate. There have been plenty of artists who fetched high prices for their work while still alive and active. Perhaps not for sums in the millions, but enough to allow the artist to live in wealth and comfort, and to be selective concerning patronage. Poussin. Michelangelo. Rubens. Dali. And many, many more. Painters who gained recognition after death but not during lifetime are the exception, not the rule.
I just enjoy turning my photos into paintings using Topaz simplify!!!! :thumbup:
RMM
Loc: Suburban New York
Someone, please tell me that somebody misplaced their decimal point. Maybe lost it altogether.
warrior wrote:
I just enjoy turning my photos into paintings using Topaz simplify!!!! :thumbup:
A lot easier.
Put them on canvas instead of photo paper and you might have a winner. ;) :thumbup:
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.