Was the photo sold by Gursky or by a private collector if it is the later gursky won't see a dime from the sale, the same thing with Sherman's selfportrait. Gursky's photo is not my taste but tastes differ furthermore the art market has nothing to do with art and everything to do with the market. Art is sold like stock and just like the stockmarket it mostly produces bubbles created by some selfserving individuals. Never forget who Damien Hearst's best costumer is the answer is simple Damien Hearst. He buys most of his works and creates the illusion of being one of the most expensive Artists in the world, while in reality he buys the stuff himself basically he's a fraud. I doubt that Gursky buys his own work I rather believe that the market creates artist no matter what the artists does for the simple reason to have something to sell.
Dominik
i would like to see a roomfilled with his work.
i'm glad someone is making money in this bad art-economy.
Good point, if you have enough money enjoy...... I have always like this photographers work and would love to see a full on exhibit.
As an investment I wonder what the buyer will be feeling like when the colour image fades to a cyan blob, its the only archille's heel point I see in large , expensive colour works on photographic paper or inkjet. Maybe there is a print replacement policy in place. I have always wondered how this issue is being solved, or is it being ignored for the first twenty years of a colour prints life, because after that it goes downhill quite fast depending upon where it is displayed.
The Gursky photograph, it's so boring I could cry. If you took it out in the street and ran it over with a truck a few times, it might get to be interesting...
It's better than that Cindy Sherman malarki.
But someone else found it interesting enough to pay millions. That's what makes the world go 'round. One cannot be objective when criticizing someone else's work because, by nature, it is a subjective/personal opinion. So, the correct wording would be that it is boring for YOU. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't pay $10 to hang that on my wall but I'm not shocked (nor upset) that someone else thinks it is other-worldly.
Max, but do you really think the person who bought it found it millions of dollars worth of interesting? I highly doubt it. I bet whoever it is thought it was maybe a thousand dollars worth of interesting and the remaining millions worth of investment value, prestige (?), whatever. Once you're into the millions it's got little to do with enjoying any piece of art, I think. I can half understand those prices for famous paintings and sculptures, but in the end this is just a c-print.
i would like to see a roomfilled with his work.
Was the photo sold by Gursky or by a private collector if it is the later gursky won't see a dime from the sale, the same thing with Sherman's selfportrait.
Dominik
I, too, like Gursky's work, but by the general tone of the comments here and other threads about contemporary photography I hope nobody wonders why none of these photographers are willing to participate on Apug.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?