Yeah...I'd pay $4.3 Million for this.....

[C_Dave45]

What the hell is wrong with people?

$4.3 million dollars for THIS??!!!!!!!!

http://news.yahoo.com/photos/u-s--1316130479-slideshow/1999-photograph-provided-chrisities-shows-rhine-river-german-photo-213521798.html


http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/dXgecQinbEwfz63LZaOlWg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD0zNTM7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/0dc50e8548d51d19fe0e6a706700f3b1.jpg

[lasimmon]

Haha yah I heard about this. Someone wa commenting that you could buy land and build a huge house with big bay windows and look at the river every day for far less then what the picture sold for.

[lellowrx7]

on acrylic glass or whatever they said would look pretty cool though
every time i go into south center mall i browse around that art store. those jesus statues in the back made of crystal for like 100k or whatever would be wicked too

[kvg]

I guess it was made with multiple shots to make one and its as clean from 6" as from 16'

[Mitsu3000gt]

This is why I think most art is completely stupid. I could take a shit on a piece of paper, and one person will view it like it is, and the other will be like "omg, this is so deep, I can feel the emotion of the artist, I will pay 5 million". Then if the artist is popular, they can literally do whatever they want, people will try and find meanings that aren't there, and pay ridiculous sums for absolute trash. Abstract art is even more hilarious haha. In my old building we had a giant canvas where someone just hurled buckets of paint across it, and it was over $50,000. A kindergarten class could have done the same job.

[adidas]

Since we are talking about art, how do you know what is worth $1000 and what is worth $25?

Someone please give me a break down

[gretz]

Art is worth whatever someone is willing to pay

[botox]

Meh as long as the winner is happy with the purchase and can pay for it, it's all good. 4.3mil is probably pocket change to the guy who bought it. You should see some of the paintings at our work, it looks like finger painting done by kindergarten kids and I'm pretty sure it's not cheap.

[masoncgy]

I thought that was a storm pond down in High River at first.

That's how easy I could replicate that photograph.

[R154]

what makes a kia so in expensive in comparison to a Bentley?

Clout? Quality? Appeal? Same general idea with art. For the same reason Monet > Average ACAD student, Bentley > Kia.

I am by no means an art fan, I have some Banksy, but other then that, the idea that paint on a canvas can be worth into the hundreds of millions is just unconscionable to be.

Oh well, for the same reason one would pay millions of dollars for a 250GTO, the same person is bidding millions on a portrait of the land that car was built on. Art is Art, its price is directly subject to the financial means of its audience.

A meal at the keg has the same constituents as a meal at Ruth Chris (sp?). The question is, how much are you willing to pay for cooked cow, dried paint or pounded metal?

[Power_Of_Rotary]

Originally posted by R154
what makes a kia so in expensive in comparison to a Bentley?

Clout? Quality? Appeal? Same general idea with art. For the same reason Monet > Average ACAD student, Bentley > Kia.

I am by no means an art fan, I have some Banksy, but other then that, the idea that paint on a canvas can be worth into the hundreds of millions is just unconscionable to be.

Oh well, for the same reason one would pay millions of dollars for a 250GTO, the same person is bidding millions on a portrait of the land that car was built on. Art is Art, its price is directly subject to the financial means of its audience.

A meal at the keg has the same constituents as a meal at Ruth Chris (sp?). The question is, how much are you willing to pay for cooked cow, dried paint or pounded metal?

Are you kidding me? a Bently and a Kia?

[R154]

They both transport people from point a to b. Im sorry, the steven hawking edition flying-spur notwithstanding, its not like bentleys are time machines.



Tell me how this isnt a perfect comparison, and i'll do my best to illustrate my point further...

[taemo]

this is old but here's the list of the 15 most expensive pictures ever taken
http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/the-15-most-expensive-pictures-ever-taken

[Cos]

Originally posted by R154
what makes a kia so in expensive in comparison to a Bentley?


Although I see your point I think that is a horrible comparison. A KIA does not have real birch wood. A KIA doesnt have a 500hp hand built V8 or W12. Drive the cars and tell me the you cant see the difference.

Now for art, it is mounted on the same frame, it is taken by the same type of art student. I can see when photos or pictures are taken by famous artists but when there are random 1 off pieces done by an art student what makes a can of paint thrown onto a canvas any better than the same painting done by me?

I have some nice art because I like it, I am not an art hater, I just dont understand how you get to hundreds of thousands of dollars or more in cost.

[C_Dave45]

Originally posted by R154
what makes a kia so in expensive in comparison to a Bentley?




Originally posted by Power_Of_Rotary


Are you kidding me? a Bently and a Kia?
x100!!!
Good God, that's the most retarded and idiotic analogy I've ever heard.
Don't even know where to begin on explaining the lunacy of that statement.
First of all, the materials used in a Bentley are about a 1,000 times more expensive than a Kia. Hand crafted leather, the finest exotic woods, not to mention the engine and running gear being so much more superior. The time involved in putting a Bentley together, as well as the engineering...
Yeah..this Ferrari is only more expensive than your Hyundai because of perception.
Art is completely different. That picture was made with the exact same materials as any other photo. No more time, no more expertise, no more precision.
Wow....*still shaking my head*.

:facepalm:

[R154]

There is nothing idiotic about comparing two items that essentially do the same thing. A car brings you from one place to another. A piece of art sits on a wall.

Do you really think that it costs 20X as much to build a Bentley then that of a Kia (final price differential)? How much R&D went into that Kia? Dont think for a second that the R&D and engineering didnt cost them huge amounts. I would wager that KIA has to spend in orders of magnitude more then bentley for R&D lineup for lineup.


This is an interesting topic as on a CAR FORUM of course we would attribute and rationalize the cost of these items because of our own emotional attachments to it.

So lets level the playing Field. What makes an STS Cadillac with every option available (4 door loafer) @ 81K out the door, so much more expensive then a Buick Lucerne Fully optioned out the door in the same class with almost the same "options" 40K? Where is the 40K differential? And by extension again, a Bentley Continental Flying Spur out the door @ about 220K. How is it that a 4 door saloon serving the same basic need (transportation) can it cost in orders of magnitude more. Dont tell me that an engine and some wood make a car cost 3x.

While we are at it, what makes a Maybach 62 (462000) worth more then a Bentley Continental Flying Spur (220000) Let me guess, the birch used in the Maybach is twice as old?

Its right there in Bentley's mission statement: Uncompromising PRESTIGE. If you're in a tax bracket that allows you to spend 220K on a car, why not?

So are you telling me that within the art community, whatever attributes which make that piece of art "worth" that much to someone is stupid right? So isnt it equally as stupid as paying 3x more for a Bentley then for a Cadillac?

I am not saying I understand or even agree with some artists work being worth millions upon millions of dollars. It is mind boggling; however, to look down on these artists and these collectors is just hypocritical when you place such strong value in metal leather and plastic just the same.

To you and me, a piece of art sits on the wall. To someone willing to pay millions for it, clearly it means much more then that.

BTW art* is by and large an appreciating asset... whereas cars, with the exception of a few cases, isnt. The mona lisa will always be worth at least 3/4 of a BILLION dollars (with consideration to today's market, and inflation)... show me ANY car worth that much at ANY point in history... well, you cant.

*When I say art, I mean collectable and generally sought after pieces, not your daughters finger painting, or my efforts at drawing haha.

[Cos]

Originally posted by R154
...........

You are comparing use for dollar, we are comparing and seeking clarity on quality per dollar.

Two totally different things

On the use/dollar scale you are correct a Bently and a Kia are the same (or close).

On the quality/dollar scale they are vastly different.

[flipstah]

Originally posted by taemo
this is old but here's the list of the 15 most expensive pictures ever taken
http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/the-15-most-expensive-pictures-ever-taken

Some of those shots are quite well-done and worth its value (circa before 1900s!)

:thumbsup:

[RY213]

Originally posted by C_Dave45




x100!!!
Good God, that's the most retarded and idiotic analogy I've ever heard.
Don't even know where to begin on explaining the lunacy of that statement.
First of all, the materials used in a Bentley are about a 1,000 times more expensive than a Kia. Hand crafted leather, the finest exotic woods, not to mention the engine and running gear being so much more superior. The time involved in putting a Bentley together, as well as the engineering...
Yeah..this Ferrari is only more expensive than your Hyundai because of perception.
Art is completely different. That picture was made with the exact same materials as any other photo. No more time, no more expertise, no more precision.
Wow....*still shaking my head*.

:facepalm:

A quick google shows a 1961 Ferrari 250gt Spider which sold for 5.7 million pounds. My 2008 WRX is probably just as fast if not faster, has more options and features and is built better. Would I rather have the WRX? Fuck no! The Ferrari is a classic, it is automobile art and it is timeless.
Its the same with art, there is a huge difference between a Rothko painting and having some ACAD student throw some paint on a canvass. The choices of color, the brush strokes and the composition all add to the aesthetic value of a painting. There is a reason Monet, Davinci, Rueben etc are called masters. Just because you dont have the eye for it, dont dismiss it as garbage.

[R154]

Okay. What about the difference between a Patek Philippe VS any Rolex?

Quality is reputable on both sides, pick any watch with the same complications (whatever the fuck that means) and similar bezel. Why the difference in price?

[R154]

Originally posted by RY213


A quick google shows a 1961 Ferrari 250gt Spider which sold for 5.7 million pounds. My 2008 WRX is probably just as fast if not faster, has more options and features and is built better. Would I rather have the WRX? Fuck no! The Ferrari is a classic, it is automobile art and it is timeless.
Its the same with art, there is a huge difference between a Rothko painting and having some ACAD student throw some paint on a canvass. The choices of color, the brush strokes and the composition all add to the aesthetic value of a painting. There is a reason Monet, Davinci, Rueben etc are called masters. Just because you dont have the eye for it, dont dismiss it as garbage.


This was my point. Thanks man.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by C_Dave45
What the hell is wrong with people?

$4.3 million dollars for THIS??!!!!!!!!

http://news.yahoo.com/photos/u-s--1316130479-slideshow/1999-photograph-provided-chrisities-shows-rhine-river-german-photo-213521798.html


http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/dXgecQinbEwfz63LZaOlWg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD0zNTM7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/0dc50e8548d51d19fe0e6a706700f3b1.jpg

I'm actually looking for a print of this for the office at work. I saw it on Yahoo and for some reason, I love it.

Anyone know where I can get one?

[Mar]

Originally posted by RY213
A quick google shows a 1961 Ferrari 250gt Spider which sold for 5.7 million pounds.
They had that car on Top Gear last season. Jeremy wasn't allowed to drive it because they couldn't afford the insurance.

[max_boost]

The Origins of Pleasure

RPicL1AWrs8

[Chantastic]

The weird part is it almost looks like a Mark Rothko/color field painting. That being said, it is so...perfect. It's divided right across the center line, and those strips of grass and road are almost parallel with the water. While some of you say you could take the exact same photo, I bet half of you couldn't.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I could take the exact same photo, nor am I'm not saying I like it at all, in fact I find it pretty boring. But anything to do with landscape I am generally not a fan of, it's simply just not a subject manner I am interested in.

Would I spend 4 mill on any piece of art? No way, because I simply don't have that kind of money. Why people are bothered by what people spend money on amuses is me. It's not your money, it's theirs. If you've got a problem with how people spend money on art, then you hate the system, not art.

Some of my friends think I'm crazy for spending so much cash on modifying my car, but too me it's worth it (till the chasis rusted out haha). I could say the same of them buying a $700 Coach bag, it's something I will never understand myself but I respect their decision, because it's NOT MY MONEY.

edit: I should mention that this is coming from a ACAD grad.

[max_boost]

I'm glad I don't have the *eye* to appreciate art. I also don't care much for sports memorabilia either. But there's definitely something to the origins of pleasure because the history of it means everything.

[Kloubek]

Originally posted by gretz
Art is worth whatever someone is willing to pay

This. I have no idea who the artist was who did this, but if they didn't have a name for themselves already, nobody would have paid that amount for the picture.

[nich148_9]

Originally posted by Chantastic
The weird part is it almost looks like a Mark Rothko/color field painting. That being said, it is so...perfect. It's divided right across the center line, and those strips of grass and road are almost parallel with the water. While some of you say you could take the exact same photo, I bet half of you couldn't.


I think this is what's so incredible about it. It's almost an abstract work, but looking closely, it becomes very literal and representative. Other factors may include that it's huge (140 inches wide), and very clean.

[Zewind]

4.3 million, pffftt pocket change :P

[powerslave]

Where's Zoidberg when you need him?

"One art please!"