Digital Art sales

[cliveh]

What do people think about this? Is this the future for digital art sales?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56362174

 

[4season]

It makes me feel old, because when I view content like this about creating art NFTs, I just go "huh?".

Because while the mechanics of creating one seem straightforward enough, I feel like there's something fundamental that I'm not understanding, namely, why a person would want to buy such things.

 

[cliveh]

It's a bit like the art version of crypto currency, you are buying a series of ones and zeros. Does this mean that I can print screen and sell the copy at a similar value?

 

[Kino]

Cargo cult shenanigans...

 

[DREW WILEY]

Sounds about as appealing and tasty as a "digital steak" you can't really taste or smell, let alone swallow. Must be a lot of bored people out there, waiting to get back to real work. Maybe they just finally got tired of Googling wacko conspiracy theory sites.

 

[radiant]

I think is interesting. We humans are hoarders and we want to buy stuff, mostly for very stupid and unpractical reasons. We want to look good.

The digital assets fit into this circus. Remember iPhone app "I am rich" which cost something like 1000 USD and it only showed one image on screen? There were people actually buying that app. You can laugh but that is reality and tells much about us humans.

Did you see the part of unisocks? https://unisocks.exchange/ - current price $113336.16 per socks and probably rising..

About NFT from Wikipedia:

"Art was an early use case for NFTs, and blockchain technology in general, because of the purported ability of NFTs to provide proof of authenticity and ownership of digital art, a medium that was designed for ease of mass reproduction, and unauthorized distribution through the Internet.[6]

NFTs can also be used to represent in-game assets which are controlled by the user instead of the game developer.[7] NFTs allow assets to be traded on third-party marketplaces without permission from the game developer. "

I think that sounds pretty smart actually.

 

[AgX]

Those who have read the BBC article and this thread so far, still may wonder what NFT means.

 

[Nitroplait]

How about buying a tweet? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56307153
With all the attention Trump got from his Twitter account, he could have lived the rest of his life in luxury just from selling old Tweets. Too bad for him Twitter closed the account.

 

[radiant]

How about buying a tweet? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56307153

"Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey has listed his first ever tweet for sale, with bids reaching $2.5m (£1.8m)."

There is a chance that the winner of the bid just deletes the tweet. Like banksy made the shredder for his painting..

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Absurd. However it is your money.

 

[removed account4]

It all looks like fantastic investment opportunities.
Times like this I wish I had more cash, the digital marketplace is filled with great opportunities ( as seen in this thread ). I’ve invested heavily in pre2000 series American $1 bills and 1976/1776 American (bicentennial) quarters. The currency is worth about 50% more than face value because it was pre-rubberized jeans fabric, and the quarters are worth 3$ each.
I’m bummed I’m colorblind because I think I spent my copper 1943 penny, 1930 red cent and 1972 double-die Lincoln penny the other day. I was scrounging for change for old nip bottles and old beer cans . ( I keep the change in my pocket only for good luck ... and now I know how the person must have felt when he gave me the double die when I was working the register / retail ). I hate having copper in my pockets and try to get rid of most of my change I have numismaphobia...

Old tweets sound good the cone top beer can market has kind of dropped.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

What happens to your art if the fuse blows?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

"This Way to the Great Egress.
....PT Barnum

"A fool and his money are soon parted."

 

[gone]

That sure is a strangely ugly image in the op's BBC's link. Part of me is aghast at seeing what's happened to the art world (industry?), while the other part is fine w/ it. Photographs weren't allowed to be hung in museums at one time because they weren't "art", so there's always going to be resistance and derision from the established order.

Change generally looks pretty rough in the beginning, and is usually treated that way. Even Whistler, one of the more conservative of painters at the time, was accused of "flinging a pot of paint in the public's face". Look, this is art. Let's keep our expectations low.

The 'ones and zeros' thing used to bother me too, but in the end, nothing is permanent. Thankfully I just make the stuff. It doesn't have to be judged by anyone other than me and I don't even want to hear what anyone else thinks of it. One gallery opening attendance was one too many, and the only reason to go to other artist's openings is for the treats and vino. As long as they're not digital creations, I'm happy.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

That sure is a strangely ugly image in the op's BBC's link. Part of me is aghast at seeing what's happened to the art world (industry?), while the other part is fine w/ it. Photographs weren't allowed to be hung in museums at one time because they weren't "art", so there's always going to be resistance and derision from the established order.

Change generally looks pretty rough in the beginning, and is usually treated that way. Even Whistler, one of the more conservative of painters at the time, was accused of "flinging a pot of paint in the public's face". Look, this is art. Let's keep our expectations low.

The 'ones and zeros' thing used to bother me too, but in the end, nothing is permanent. Thankfully I just make the stuff. It doesn't have to be judged by anyone other than me and I don't even want to hear what anyone else thinks of it. One gallery opening attendance was one too many, and the only reason to go to other artist's openings is for the treats and vino. As long as they're not digital creations, I'm happy.

It's one thing that I post my images on Flickr. It doesn't cost you anything to look. But to spend $67 million for art that's 1's and 0's, that you can't hold like someone or something you love, just doesn't have the same worth or appeal to me. On the other hand, considering how social media creates relationships rather than hugging friends, Zoom, and everything else we remotely do digitally, maybe its time has come.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

"A fool and his money are soon parted."

Oh, if only I was the one to do the parting. I see it as a patriotic duty - a fool with money is a dangerous thing indeed.

As for buying digital art - if it's 1's & 0's it can be copied. There is no original.

OTOH: I claimed, way back in the 80's - "It isn't real until it's virtual." I'm not sure what that means, but as it sounds good it must be true. The people I was with at the time decided to take my keys and drive me home.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Oh, if only I was the one to do the parting. I see it as a patriotic duty - a fool with money is a dangerous thing indeed.

As for buying digital art - if it's 1's & 0's it can be copied. There is no original.

OTOH: I claimed, way back in the 80's - "It isn't real until it's virtual." I'm not sure what that means, but as it sounds good it must be true. The people I was with at the time decided to take my keys and drive me home.

Yes. You shouldn't have been driving.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

NFts are more a collectible than they are art, like beenie babies. It is just a massive bubble right now. You should probably avoid them like the plague... The rule of thumb for anything like this is once you hear about it in the news, it is too late.

I suppose in the future NFTs will become useful for ownership. One good thing about NFTs is they are smart contracts, so when one gets sold again, the "artist" gets part of the sale. So if someone buys an NFT for say $100, then later sells it for $2000, the "artist" makes more from the second sale then the first. The underlying technology is more interesting than the bubble going on right now.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

NFts are more a collectible than they are art, like beenie babies. It is just a massive bubble right now. You should probably avoid them like the plague... The rule of thumb for anything like this is once you hear about it in the news, it is too late.

I suppose in the future NFTs will become useful for ownership. One good thing about NFTs is they are smart contracts, so when one gets sold again, the "artist" gets part of the sale. So if someone buys an NFT for say $100, then later sells it for $2000, the "artist" makes more from the second sale then the first. The underlying technology is more interesting than the bubble going on right now.

How do you brag about your $68 million dollar artwork if you can't hang it on your wall? What good is the pickup expression, "Would you like to come over to my apartment and see my etchings?" What do you do? Pull out your iPhone and flash it at people. The whole thing is just silly. For a million, I'll email all my Flickr pictures to anyone who pays.

 

[MattKing]

Seems to be useful for things like trademarks and logos.

 

[halfaman]

It is crucial to understand that the art market has nothing to do with art. It is a mixture of finance and snobbery.

 

[cliveh]

It is crucial to understand that the art market has nothing to do with art. It is a mixture of finance and snobbery.

Or money laundering.

 

[cliveh]

Some of his images are very good:-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56368868

 

[grain elevator]

Isn't this tech theoretically great new for commercial photographers, if it can be employed to prevent unlicensed distribution of images?

 

[radiant]

Isn't this tech theoretically great new for commercial photographers, if it can be employed to prevent unlicensed distribution of images?

It doesn't prevent distribution. It makes copyright transfer and trading much more versatile.