Jump to content
biel

6,5 milions for this pic???

Recommended Posts

Es un mundo loco.

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many are more about marketing than photography or indeed art, like a lot of contemporary "art".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many are more about marketing than photography or indeed art, like a lot of contemporary "art".

Emperor's new clothes!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather have Churchill's 'The goldfish pool at Chartwell' thanks very much- it's only estimated at £400-600,000.

http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2014/daughter-history-mary-soames-legacy-churchill-l14316/lot.181.html

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a ridiculous amount of money for anything IMHO

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter Lik's work is now worth $6.5 million a print.

 

I wonder if the buyer has 10 other prints by Peter Lik that he bought previously for an average of $10,000 per print?

 

If that is so, his total spending of $6.6 million, would make his total Peter Lik collection of 11 prints now worth $73 million. Good use of $6.6 million, but only if he can sell the prints for $6.5 million each. Or the buyer could get a tax writeoff for $73 million by donating his Lik collection to a charity or museum.

 

Peter Lik has a gallery on Maui, and other tourist hot spots. He is a very good photographer.

 

This high price is not art, it is the business of art. It is the same business as someone paying $250 million for a Cezanne in 2011.

 

The securities market is regulated, the art market is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Peter Lik's work is now worth $6.5 million a print.
 
I wonder if the buyer has 10 other prints by Peter Lik that he bought previously for an average of $10,000 per print?
 
If that is so, his total spending of $6.6 million, would make his total Peter Lik collection of 11 prints now worth $73 million. Good use of $6.6 million, but only if he can sell the prints for $6.5 million each. Or the buyer could get a tax writeoff for $73 million by donating his Lik collection to a charity or museum.
 
Peter Lik has a gallery on Maui, and other tourist hot spots. He is a very good photographer.
 
This high price is not art, it is the business of art. It is the same business as someone paying $250 million for a Cezanne in 2011.
 
The securities market is regulated, the art market is not.

 

 

:D Maybe he bought 2 copies of each... 

 

I am curious though... what's to stop the photographer producing another print of the same photograph? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least its a better pic than http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/nov/11/andreas-gursky-rhine-ii-photograph that went for $4 million a while back. A what and his money are soon parted? 

Col

 

Now that really is amazing... it'll be white cat in a snowstorm or black cat in a coal cellar soon - as I said before, it really is the Emperor's New Clothes all over again...

 

What a marketing machine they must have to get those prices.  And the Rhine shot was totally intentional - right! Bet it wan't the only shot he took that day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least its a better pic than http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/nov/11/andreas-gursky-rhine-ii-photograph that went for $4 million a while back. A what and his money are soon parted? 

Col

 

Hmmm... I would have probably marked that one as RF. Time to rethink those bleak landscapes. B)

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What really p***ed me off in The Guardian article was "Photography is not an art. It is a technology." - that is proper bs. I think it is great that Peter Lik get these mindbogglingly amounts for some of his prints, it is good for photography as an art-form. 

 

Everyone involved in photography need to get back to putting a proper value on an image. As photographers we should support this, regardless if we like a particular photograph or not. I rather see these crazy prices for photographs then as one often "hear" that a image from a digital camera is worth nothing, a few cents or a few dollars maximum.

 

We should appreciate that these vast amounts of money is being used for buying a photograph as art, even if one doesn't get why - there are some really ugly proper paintings out there that are worth millions that look ridiculous....to me.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What really p***ed me off in The Guardian article was "Photography is not an art. It is a technology." - that is proper bs. I think it is great that Peter Lik get these mindbogglingly amounts for some of his prints, it is good for photography as an art-form. 

 

Everyone involved in photography need to get back to putting a proper value on an image. As photographers we should support this, regardless if we like a particular photograph or not. I rather see these crazy prices for photographs then as one often "hear" that a image from a digital camera is worth nothing, a few cents or a few dollars maximum.

 

We should appreciate that these vast amounts of money is being used for buying a photograph as art, even if one doesn't get why - there are some really ugly proper paintings out there that are worth millions that look ridiculous....to me.

 

Totally agree. The Guardian article you mention was much more worthy of photographers' criticism.

 

Some of the comments in this thread are almost word for word (although discussing different amounts I must add :-) ) the same as I have heard about some of my 4 figure sales for images here (Alamy) and elsewhere (it's not the photo that sold, it has to be the marketing: what fool would pay that amount of money for what is after all just a photograph; it was just a lucky shot, anyone could have done it; etc etc etc).

 

I celebrate that photography is not universally always the poor cousin of "real" art, that a photographer doesn't necessarily have to sell his/her soul selling a thousand photos of smiling women eating salad to make a living (okay, I've afforded myself a little license there . . . ).

 

If we're going to declare a certain limit on what photographs should sell for, where will it end: $1,000,000 . . . $100,000 . . . $1,000 . . . ???

 

Celebrate a fellow photographer's success, we're all on the same continuum and photography as a valued and valuable contributor to the fabric of art or whatever you want to call it is surely a good thing.

 

IMO of course.

 

dd

Edited by dustydingo
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair play to the man who can sell an image for that amount in amongst a sea of similars on the net.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could not buy one leg of a top class footballer for that.

Personally anything that raises the profile and value of photography if fine with me..... off to edit my price list!

Edited by Mark Baigent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could not buy one leg of a top class footballer for that.

 

Personally anything that raise the profile and value of photography if fine with me..... off to edit my price list!

You do make me laugh... I did that before I posted my comment!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I don't think you can purchase a footballer in parts, can you? Probably can't get this image in parts either. 

 

Hey, Mike. I spotted two young Asian girls looking at a map of NYC today. I greeted them in Japanese. It turned out they were from Shanghai, and had pretty good English, too.   :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I don't think you can purchase a footballer in parts, can you? Probably can't get this image in parts either. 

 

Hey, Mike. I spotted two young Asian girls looking at a map of NYC today. I greeted them in Japanese. It turned out they were from Shanghai, and had pretty good English, too.   :(

 

I had the reverse problem when I came to Japan - I asked a Western girl which bottle of random slightly brown/yellow liquid was olive oil in a shop - she was obviously fluent in Japanese and could read it from the conversation she had had with the shop staff.  I struggled with her Russian...  :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.