random We Need A General Section For Random Stuff Like This

[NoLongerHere]

But as we haven't this is the closest.

Someone called Beeple, who I can't say I've heard of but he has an instagram account so must be famous!, sold this for $60.25m ($69m after fees), yes that's millions. No, really it is and no it's not April yet.

https://onlineonly.christies.com/s/beeple-first-5000-days/beeple-b-1981-1/112924

A bunch of seemingly random photos and digital art. Of course the arty farty types have called it "one of the most unique bodies of work to emerge in the history of digital art." They obviously didn't look too hard as there's some wonderful stuff out there and this isn't one of those.

As they say it's who you know not what you know and that seems to be especially true in the art world.

Anyway keep plugging on with your designs, get a good agent (or in this case one who performs miracles) who can find people with more money than sense and remember me when you are rich 

 

[PeterRex]

Well, I'm not an art specialist, but I wouldn't hang this one on the walls of my loo.

But as they say: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

They can have one of mine for a 10th of the price! 🙂 

And you are right, there are digital artists out there with far greater potential and it is not as if they are hiding.

[AlanPickup]

Caught my attention so looked further 

https://www.designboom.com/art/what-is-nft-why-non-fungible-art-marketplace-millions-04-06-2021/ 

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

Looks like another craze to follow the Bit Coin, Ok until the Bubble bursts

[NoLongerHere]

33 minutes ago, PeterRex said:

Well, I'm not an art specialist, but I wouldn't hang this one on the walls of my loo.

But as they say: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

They can have one of mine for a 10th of the price! 🙂 

And you are right, there are digital artists out there with far greater potential and it is not as if they are hiding.

That's the case with the vast majority of modern "art", I wouldn't hang it in my loo. The rubbish gets the attention and seemingly the money but there are still artists out there with artistic talent too.

But at least a bit of effort went in to it unlike the people who painted a canvas a one or two colours like Robert Ryman, Barnett Newman and Mark Rothko and made millions.

[NoLongerHere]

34 minutes ago, AlanPickup said:

Caught my attention so looked further 

https://www.designboom.com/art/what-is-nft-why-non-fungible-art-marketplace-millions-04-06-2021/ 

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

Looks like another craze to follow the Bit Coin, Ok until the Bubble bursts

Crypto, the most pointless thing ever. Uses a huge amount of resources to mine using pointless calculations. Bitcoin was meant to be, as the name implies, a currency, they've given up with that and call it an investment as fees made it useless as a currency. The trouble is it's closer to blind luck which isn't an investment.

[Alfred]

https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/11/22325054/beeple-christies-nft-sale-cost-everydays-69-million

[NoLongerHere]

“I’m confident it’s not a hype thing” yeah right... Lucky him though, going from selling at $100 max before this nonsense started. Perhaps we should be seeing how to get in on the action rather than laughing at the gullible who buy this sort of stuff.

[StuartRc]

Yeah!....

I just read the verge article from @Alfred I like the bit about 'pulling traditional artists into the digital world'...Funny I thought the 'digital world' is already full of very talented artists that never get noticed....only need to look on Artstation or Behance for that!...
 

..reminds me I must collect some cow pats from the hill and scatter some meteorite dust and offer it for auction!

 

[Alfred]

3 hours ago, VectorVonDoom said:

Crypto, the most pointless thing ever. Uses a huge amount of resources to mine using pointless calculations. Bitcoin was meant to be, as the name implies, a currency, they've given up with that and call it an investment as fees made it useless as a currency. The trouble is it's closer to blind luck which isn't an investment.

Bitcoin mining consumes more electricity than all the electric cars currently in existence worldwide.

Bitcoin is a mouth hungry for fossil fuels

[NoLongerHere]

I know, more electricity than Argentina uses and that's just bitcoin. Although electric cars aren't as green or as ethical as they like to make out.

[Smee Again]

Looks like someone broke out the Serif Montage disk and had a go. I still have that disk, came free with something I ordered about 10 years ago.

 

[sacboi]

Good for him, whatever pays the bills and/or drags in the punters too splash-tha-cash

There's really no dignity being a 'starving artiste'

[sacboi]

...but the price for our digital lives, may be unsustainable - Digital Carbon Footprint: What's the Environmental Impact of the Online World? 

[PeterRex]

And since this is the random space …

A bit of inspiration: Aubrey Vincent Beardsley

[NoLongerHere]

A couple of examples that are even worse but these types of things, one or 2 colour canvases, seem to be fairly common in high end "art".

Barnett Newman‘s 1953 “Onement VI” sold for $43.8 Million.

Robert Ryman's 1930 Bridge sold for $20.6m. Looks like a badly done undercoat.

They show that rubbish pretending to be art isn't a new thing, it has just become much more common. If someone posted something like those on here, or anywhere, it wouldn't get a second look regardless of how much gobbledygook had been written about its meaning.

[Ren De]

O.k. Time to toss in my 2 cents worth. I count myself marginally artsy (maybe more than a little fartsy) and it appears to me much of this genre relies far more on marketing than the magic one would expect from a master designer, or painter. (Now head down again)... 🤓

[NoLongerHere]

I think that's it however you do also need someone with more money than sense to fall for it and pay insane amounts.

[PeterRex]

I think it's a bit like @Ren Desaid : Talking the talk is more important then knowing your craft.

Or maybe like "Diner de cons", where rich, bored people invite a randomly picked simpelton for diner to laugh of their lower backs behind his back.

 

*typo

[NoLongerHere]

So that's why they invite me to dinner 😳

[PeterRex]

1 minute ago, VectorVonDoom said:

So that's why they invite me to dinner 😳

Hmm, not sure if I should answer this one …

[Ren De]

If simpleton is the bar I feel slighted - still no invite... (maybe i’m overqualified in that area)...  🤨

[NoLongerHere]

I don't normally use instagram, partly as they are owned by facebook, but I thought I'd post my stuff on there anyway. It was sort of interesting to see what people "liked". Obviously I'm unknown on there, and pretty much everywhere else come to that, so no followers it was just if people noticed any of it amongst the millions of other posts. Anyway the fairly simple things like lego figures and my low-ish poly versions of art were more popular than the complicated things that took weeks or longer. So makes you wonder why and if it's worth spending a ton of effort on things especially if you wanted to try and make money from it, for example selling prints.

[PeterRex]

@VectorVonDoom it would be known if Instagram were a bastion of good taste and art! That said, I'm there as well, but it allways strikes me what people like.

Boobs and female backsides work always, as for the tastier stuff…

If you want hits, appeal to the baser instincts of the masses! 😂

That said, if you search, you'll find lots of good artists and craftspeople, but far too often whithout the following of thousands of crap producers.

[NoLongerHere]

There are some very talented people on there hidden amongst a lot of the opposite. It is amazing the type of stuff that gets a ton of likes, always helps if you are female and pretty though!

[dannyg9]

On 3/14/2021 at 11:35 AM, VectorVonDoom said:

A couple of examples that are even worse but these types of things, one or 2 colour canvases, seem to be fairly common in high end "art".

Barnett Newman‘s 1953 “Onement VI” sold for $43.8 Million.

Robert Ryman's 1930 Bridge sold for $20.6m. Looks like a badly done undercoat.

They show that rubbish pretending to be art isn't a new thing, it has just become much more common. If someone posted something like those on here, or anywhere, it wouldn't get a second look regardless of how much gobbledygook had been written about its meaning.

I respectfully disagree with you on Barnett Newman and other artists that basically comes up and to Basquiat and Keith Haring (graffiti art to put it at its most basic term). There was a movement amongst abstract expressionists (and Cubists, to a degree) to break down the norms of "Painting" or "Art" and culminating with single canvases of one color. Is it monumental? That depends on your judgement, but in the context of art history they did it FIRST. Same goes for Warhol. When art has been broken down to Rothko canvases or Pollock drip paintings (any drips AFTER Pollock is just copycat), what's left? Elevate the everyday and mundane objects such as Brillo boxes and Campbell soup cans and objectify them as art. I also like to think that with certain pieces by modern era artists that in private conversations they were possibly laughing up their sleeves. Duchamp putting a urinal on a pedestal at an exhibition comes to mind. So too the piece from Beeple. Absolutely nothing ground-breaking in regards to originality or even some sort of remarkable creativity. BUT whomever posted it and sold it was or seemingly IS the first person to do that. I'd be laughing all the way to the bank at the person crazy enough to pay that amount for something not even tangible, much less original. 

And also keep in mind, just because some cash-crazy individuals with gobs of money to burn purchase new or old art, doesn't mean that the work is elevated just because of an auction house price tag. Don't confuse scarcity of "product" and "Status-Greed" with actual worth. Case in point, there are collectors the world over who have bought vintage guitars at outrageous prices and locked them away in a vault, purely as an investment. Scarcity of some instruments, such as a 50s Gold Top Les Paul, DO bump up the value and price, but think about this: some of those vintage instruments sound terrible. Also when musicians can bring forth beautiful music (whatever floats your boat) out of a Stradivarius, a Steinway, or a Gibson, and those said instruments are relegated to collectable objects, then I believe the worth is diminished. They become items locked away and never to be touched or heard.

Art is very subjective and we each have likes and dislikes. I love the talent of Bob Ross and the inspiration he brought to so many in the simplest way. I think he could have stopped when his paintings were about 85% finished and not pushed them over the top with ONE MORE TREE. . . but I digress. In my teenage years, my mind was set that everything after the Renaissance was nothing. Studying and learning about art history is a powerful thing. It also disclosed that many of the Renaissance work was technically commercial in that the very rich or the church commissioned them.