Post-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev....

[Louie D.]

Coolness is extremely relative, Ari.

Right, look at the crap factor on 99.9% of the Mondo's.

[Silhouette]

You guys haven't received the cool poster list apparently.

Send it thru, and make sure it's laminated.

[eatbrie]

See, I believe that any of these posters that I bought in the past 2 weeks for a fraction of that thing up there is cooler.  I could do Mondo crap, but I chose these. 



This is my taste.  My kind of coolness.  Some of you will disagree.  Maybe all of you.  I don't give a shit, really.  I'm not out there to do self promotion.  I'm just trying to make a point that we all like different things, and it's okay.

T

[Ari]

Coolness is extremely relative, Ari.

I was taking the piss in case it wasn't obvious.

[erik1925]

See, I believe that any of these posters that I bought in the past 2 weeks for a fraction of that thing up there is cooler.  I could do Mondo crap, but I chose these.  



This is my taste.  My kind of coolness.  Some of you will disagree.  Maybe all of you.  I don't give a shit, really.  I'm not out there to do self promotion.  I'm just trying to make a point that we all like different things, and it's okay.

T

With you 100%. Beautiful selection, T.

Those are fantastic!  And you buy what you like, rather than thinking you "must" buy a certain style or "have" a certain poster, in order to qualify for some "elite status or collection," as some have expressed.

That concept is pure nonsense, IMO.

 

Jeff

[50s]

See, I believe that any of these posters that I bought in the past 2 weeks for a fraction of that thing up there is cooler.  I could do Mondo crap, but I chose these. 

Nice!

[Zorba]

International one sheet for A Christmas Story.  Zoomed from $129 in the last twenty seconds, leaving me in the dust.....

I have the quad but was watching that one too in case I would want to use a different poster in me quad frame come Xmas time but holy baby jesus that $400 is crazy people talk.

[Zorba]

With you 100%. Beautiful selection, T.

Yes indeed. T got the Goods.

I think most of us buy posters we like. Seems goofy to buy posters other people like.

[Zorba]

You guys haven't received the cool poster list apparently.

I have two of those lists. One is called my collection and the other is my want list.   

[erik1925]

I have two of those lists. One is called my collection and the other is my want list.   

 

[Dread_Pirate_Mel]

Putting things in perspective, Mark Rothko's "Black Stripe (Orange, Gold and Black)" sold for $21.3 million yesterday, probably more than the annual total sales of movie posters. The color combination is intriguing but still it's just a few paint stripes.  

[ddilts399]

Can some of you in touch with the fine art world explain that one to me!

[crowzilla]

The color combination is intriguing but still it's just a few paint stripes.  

Where have I seen that combination before...

[paul waines]

Reminds me of Santa, No wonder it sold well with Christmas coming up...


Can't wait to hear T's thoughts on it...

[Louie D.]

Can some of you in touch with the fine art world explain that one to me!

They are quite breathtaking in person, this photo does not do it justice. I just saw 4 of his canvases at the Yale Art Museum.

[eatbrie]

Not exactly my cup of tea, but quite mesmerizing.  The juxtaposition if colors is out of this world. 

Paul, I am not a big modern art fan.  Impressionism and post Impressionism is what I melt for, probably because of my upbringing.  I certainly do appreciate some pieces, like this one, but very few I'd put on my walls.

T

[paul waines]

I thought you may have some idea what drives someone to pay that kind of price on a modern piece like this..?

I just find it hard to see that kind of out lay on what Sean so eloquently puts it as, Three stripes. I do appreciate we
all have different tastes, but Taste and shelling out that kind of money on this new piece is two different games.

It's a Crazy world for sure, that money could have done a lot of good in the world.... Which I'm sure would have
given who ever bought it much more pleasure....    

[CSM]

That Rothko is nothing compared to some of his others which have sold for over $70 million!

[ATLfun]

Where have I seen that combination before...

Now that you posted your picture that is the image stuck in my mind when I see that painting. 


Brian

[MoviePosterBid.com]

in order to understand Rothko's work, you need to understand and study the history and transformation of art through the 18th to the 20th century. Youneed to study the works of a variety of artists that includes Warhol, Rothko, Pollack as well as Picasso, Dali and the French Impressionists.

By the time the modern artists of the 1950s-60s were coalescing into what are known as their popular styles, our society was at a crossroads of a new age in many ways culturally, culminating in much radical thought which changed not only painted art, but popular music, writing and film. Each is just a stairstep in a greater picture of the many constituents of modern culture, each influenced by the culture that preceeded it.

[erik1925]

Nice!

This is a beauty. Natalie looks great in blue!

[FightClub12]

To answer your question ddilts, there is no reasonable answer. The "unreasonably high" art prices are a fairly recent phenomenon. 60 Minutes did a great segment on contemporary pieces. (I'm an idiot who doesn't know how to hyperlink) but here is a link with the video:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/30/morley-safer-returns-to-art_n_1391457.html

And here is a link to the script:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57407319/even-in-tough-times-contemporary-art-sells/


Without checking those links, the short story is that somewhere in the late 20th century, art became more of a commodity instead of it's true function-- serving itself. I've always told people that the definition of art is "..something that has no purpose other than itself." And today's high-end 'art' is no longer art. It's just a money-making tool. People buy at 4 million to sell at 6 million a few years later, for example.

The value of Rothko's Black Stripe (aka:scarlet snake abstract) is completely irrelevant. It's worth what anyone will pay for it. If I were to sell a near exact copy of it, I could get it done for ~$1500-2000... does that de-value a 21million dollar piece if it's so easily reproduced?

And I can guarantee you the person who bought it does not care a lick about it's artistic merit. They bought it purely as investment. Or it could be an insane billionaire, who just likes to flaunt wealth and actually *will* hang it up, a la Mr. Burns.

Now, maybe the question you were asking was 'Why is THIS piece $21 million?? There are hundreds of artists who could paint something like this.." The answer is typically pure narrative. Who has an interesting education or back-story? Who was innovative in design or technique? Who was exploitable? ....And are they dead? When an artist dies, their work immediately goes up because there is now a limited supply. Almost every artist is classified as a "starving artist", simply due to the great number of artists and pieces of art(Even a large number of the classical masters died destitute.) It's the "CEO" analogy -- There are innumerable people capable of being a corporate CEO, yet there are very few people actually holding that position just because of the finite number of large companies. Luck has a tremendous amount to do with it. It's no different in the art world.

[Charlie]

I could get it done for ~$1500-2000... does that de-value a 21million dollar piece if it's so easily reproduced?

I am colorblind and I could get it done (at the house) for a mere $500...    

[MoviePosterBid.com]

Fightclub...
I spent the better part of my life as a dealer of comic art & illustration and I studied art of all kinds for decades, both in school and afterward. Alot fo what you posted above is really incorrect, or at least a variation of a novice look at the field of art.
First of all, high prices for art is not a recent phenomenon and "high price" is also a relative term. 50 years ago Van Gogh paintings may only have sold for $15k up to $50k or a more, but when you consider that the average CEO pay at the time was about $250-100k, then those amounts are quite high at that time. Furthermore, the vast majority of people who spend vast amounts of money on art ARE NOT thinking about investment value any more than I think my Raymond Chandler poster collection is an investment. We buy what we are interested in. That does not mean that investors are not present, but like in any field, they are a strict minority. Then, it is 100% incorrect that an artist's work goes up because he dies. It is a fallacy.

I've dealt with these uber-wealthy people all my life and while a small percentage of them do act the way you describe, the vast majority of art collectors - including the Steve Wynns - collect from a love for the material. If they can afford $20million pieces, it is no different than a person who can only afford $20 piece. You are involved at your price level and I can tell you  factually that Steve Wynn patronizes the $1000 artists as well as the dead Van Goghs

[eatbrie]

Now, maybe the question you were asking was 'Why is THIS piece $21 million?? There are hundreds of artists who could paint something like this."

There is actually a simple answer to this: "No, there are not.  There is only ONE artist who can paint this, and he's done it.  Everyone else will copy it."