I know that art is a matter of taste. How are the prices set for paintings by contemporary artists that is little more than a colorful mess on a canvas (to my untrained eye, anyway).
I just don't get it - prices can be in the tens of thousands for something that just doesn't seem to justify the sale price.
(I don't know much about art, admittedly...so please enlighten me)
2007-08-02 18:31:29 · 5 answers · asked by LadyRebecca 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Other - Visual Arts
The value of the art was in the composition, and the expression; the painterly value; the visual beauty of the colors and how they compliment one another, the geometry, etc. Basically: set aside the idea that a painting needs to illustrate something and ask yourself "is it pleasing to look at?" and maybe "what is the artist trying to illustrate in abstract terms?" Yes, I think a lot of "artists" will just slap some paint on a medium, call it art, and sell it as the same because they can, and classical training or some profound claim as to what is being portrayed is really what is being sold. Like that guy who covers a hotel room with cheese -- it's not profound, it's not art. It's just stupid. But as long as someone is willing to pay for it, then it's an art of some kind -- and maybe the artist is a con artist.
2007-08-02 18:37:39 · answer #1 · answered by Mickey Mouse Spears 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
often wondered this myself, I was at the art gallery in canberra not too long ago and saw what i can only describe as the work of a two year old with a pack of loose crayons, I can only assume that being in the national art gallery it had to cost a pretty penny but didnt see any value in it.
I mean i could get a couple of crayons and draw a stick figure and sell it as modern art and make a fortune potentially. I want to know who decides what is art and what is just drawing/ rubbish after all they must be the ones who assess the value of the art in question- right?
thinking back to the homer sculpture on the simpsons... lol
2007-08-05 23:17:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
A colourful mess perhaps. But if it was made by someone with a high profile name then it can be worth a veritable fortune. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. An artist is recognised by some group or some prominent individuals who declare the newcomer to be the next big thing, and then their fame takes on a life of its own with any output by them commanding obscene prices.
Sharks in jelly, animals regurgitating food on canvasses. Its value is in the person who created it...or at least fed the monkeys...
2007-08-03 02:32:29 · answer #3 · answered by rogavit 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's the same as with all art.
Value depends on what someone is willing to pay, and if two people want the same thing it's more than if just one wanted it as they will bid against each other for it.
2007-08-03 01:35:13 · answer #4 · answered by Weatherman 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
it depends who its done buy and how many pictures in the collection and weather anyone wants it or not. if you are an artist and you build up a name for yourself and all the rich people are desperate a picture from your new collection they will obviously throw money at you.
2007-08-03 01:37:52 · answer #5 · answered by trixydafairy 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋