Board 8 > Do you think the most expensive art paintings are worth the price?

Topic List
Page List: 1, 2
voltch
07/10/11 1:40:00 PM
#1:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_paintings

Well, I've known people who collect other stuff from Warhammer to sports memorabillia, but nothing really quite on this scale. I can kind of understand if you're buying as an investement for a gallery, but if its for a private collection then it feels like you're not getting anything of value in return for something worth over a 100million.

Then again, I don't know anyone with pockets that deep, I dunno, if you guys were high flying city slickers with really deep pockets, would you ever enter this market?

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
Liquid Wind
07/10/11 1:42:00 PM
#2:


no where near, just a hilarious example of how 1% of the population has more money than they could ever hope to use productively while the majority can barely get by day to day
... Copied to Clipboard!
Punch_Sideiron
07/10/11 1:43:00 PM
#3:


No way.
... Copied to Clipboard!
ChichiriMuyo
07/10/11 1:44:00 PM
#4:


No, they aren't worth it. Even if I had more than enough money that the cost seemed trivial, I still wouldn't pay that kind of money.

--
"Principally I hate and detest the animal called man, although I heartily love John, Peter, Thomas and so forth" - Jonathan Swift
BT with the victory!
... Copied to Clipboard!
voltch
07/10/11 1:45:00 PM
#5:


I dunno, I've had glimpses of this kind of world before, but never anything at the top level, so I can see why people collect, but I have trouble when it reaches above a certain amount and they don't reinvest their acquisition.

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
Punch_Sideiron
07/10/11 1:46:00 PM
#6:


If I had that kind of money to throw away, I would hire a painter to create paintings that I liked.

Everyone but me would hate them.
... Copied to Clipboard!
RayDyn
07/10/11 1:48:00 PM
#7:


I'm a cheap bastard, and while I can't say for certain, I believe I'd still be a cheap bastard if I had pockets that deep. So paying $140 million for Pollock's No. 5 is $139,999,999.99 too much.

--
~=The most dangerous thing in the world is a bored Marine=~
http://img.imgcake.com/SgtSphynx/soldieroffortunecoverjpgen.jpg
... Copied to Clipboard!
VincentLauw
07/10/11 1:49:00 PM
#8:


Yes and no. All of them are incredibly influential and important for the sake of art continuing (doesn't matter if you think they're ugly or whatever) its progress. People pay what they want for this and they are allowed to so why not. That said, I wouldn't pay that much money for anything ever, and especially not an art form I'm not particularly interested in. (I like the ideas and stories behind paintings, but I don't find them to be pretty when it comes down to modern ones, and even older ones are only impressive when seen in reality for me.)

--
http://img.imgcake.com/VincentLauw/ILOVEGOLFgifva.gif
... Copied to Clipboard!
FAHtastic
07/10/11 1:49:00 PM
#9:


Nah, probably not. I'd much rather use much less money to pay various comic book artists to do portraits of me as a super hero in various super hero poses and situations to hang around my mansion.

And I'd have a marble statue of myself in the lobby with a plaque that read: 'Look on my works ye mighty and despair'.

--
Still the number one reason for the success of the Internet.
... Copied to Clipboard!
RevolverSaro
07/10/11 1:50:00 PM
#10:


To be fair, you're not paying 100 million to just OWN a painting. You're paying that much money to own something created by a person of historic and cultural importance.

--
"Don't freeze up girl, you're looking quite a sight." - Adam Ant.
"Baby, can you dig your man? He's a righteous man." - Larry Underwood
... Copied to Clipboard!
Punch_Sideiron
07/10/11 1:50:00 PM
#11:


RevolverSaro posted...
To be fair, you're not paying 100 million to just OWN a painting. You're paying that much money to own something created by a person of historic and cultural importance.

Well in that case...

Still no.
... Copied to Clipboard!
metaIslugg
07/10/11 1:52:00 PM
#12:


Of course not. But this is true of just about everything, not just paintings. You're paying for rarity not quality.

--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MwZfXy9mA4
http://osu.ppy.sh/stat2/shinytentacool-0.png
... Copied to Clipboard!
voltch
07/10/11 1:52:00 PM
#13:


To own a Picasso or a Renoir, man that'd be like saying I own a hugely influential painting which is famous all over the world. Damn my ego would be proud.

But yeah owning something this sought after and made by someone with such credentials is satisfying and if I can make the centerpiece of an art gallery I could recoup its worth down the line.

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
CalvinbalI
07/10/11 1:52:00 PM
#14:


Purchasing those paintings is an investment, like anything else. If you've noticed, the value of respected paintings has been drastically increasing over the past hundred years. Private rich art collectors purchase these in the hopes that in ten years or so the bubble will have inflated even more. One day it will pop, and I think a lot of people thought and continue to think it would be during this global recession because there's been a lot of sales recently. Little did they know that the global recession didn't affect the astronomically rich in the slightest!

The real appreciators of art probably just purchase authentic paintings that were stolen ages ago. You can't publicly sell them so I doubt the purchase of one is nearly as motivated by business.

--
"It's a magical world, Hobbes ol' buddy...let's go exploring!" - Calvin
http://img.imgcake.com/calvinfinalpngpy.png
... Copied to Clipboard!
redrocket
07/10/11 1:54:00 PM
#15:


Of course not. But this is true of just about everything, not just paintings. You're paying for rarity not quality.

This. Lots of stupid things are overvalued, there's no reason to single out paintings.

--
From his looks Magus is Macho Man Randy Savage as an anime zombie. The black wind howls, and one of you will snap into a Slim Jim ooh yeeeah! -sonicblastpunch
... Copied to Clipboard!
voltch
07/10/11 1:54:00 PM
#16:


Well there was a fairly significant dip in the value of paintings sold in the immediate aftermath of the subprime crisis, but it rebounded pretty spectacularly.

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
Xiahou Shake
07/10/11 1:54:00 PM
#17:


From: RevolverSaro | #010
To be fair, you're not paying 100 million to just OWN a painting. You're paying that much money to own something created by a person of historic and cultural importance.


This isn't far from the mentality that allows for stuff like autographs to go for such absurd amounts. I once saw (with my own eyes!) a sweater worn by Seth Green sell for $3,000. The fact that having been touched by somebody in some way increases the value of an object by a multitude of thousands will forever be baffling to me.
Anyway, no, I can't imagine ever paying that much for anything, even if I had the income to back it up.

--
Falcon Punch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFtw7qW7Vcw
... Copied to Clipboard!
PartOfYourWorld
07/10/11 1:55:00 PM
#18:


No. 5, 1948 by Jackson Pollock is currently the most expensive painting ever sold.

external image

...

I can probably rival this art with $10 worth of Taco Bell.

--
Yoblazer: http://oi52.tinypic.com/ad21i1.jpg
Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world!
... Copied to Clipboard!
redrocket
07/10/11 1:57:00 PM
#19:


Xiahou Shake posted...
From: RevolverSaro | #010
To be fair, you're not paying 100 million to just OWN a painting. You're paying that much money to own something created by a person of historic and cultural importance.
This isn't far from the mentality that allows for stuff like autographs to go for such absurd amounts. I once saw (with my own eyes!) a sweater worn by Seth Green sell for $3,000. The fact that having been touched by somebody in some way increases the value of an object by a multitude of thousands will forever be baffling to me.
Anyway, no, I can't imagine ever paying that much for anything, even if I had the income to back it up.


An autograph/personal object from a historic person really isn't comparable to something they actually made through creative effort.

--
From his looks Magus is Macho Man Randy Savage as an anime zombie. The black wind howls, and one of you will snap into a Slim Jim ooh yeeeah! -sonicblastpunch
... Copied to Clipboard!
SovietOmega
07/10/11 1:58:00 PM
#20:


Yes

If only for the fact that those paying the price think it is a fair price to pay or else they would not be paying that price.

--
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding out
... Copied to Clipboard!
voltch
07/10/11 1:59:00 PM
#21:


I honestly think once you start getting wealthy to that extent, a lot of b8ers might not buy the most expensive paintings out there, but I dropping a lesser amount for other paintings from well known artists, definitely possible.

Though I guess, your appreciation of art does come from a number of different factors, like a Reubens I could see someone just being in awe at the skill used and then going after it hard.

The world of the rich is kinda strange.

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
Punch_Sideiron
07/10/11 2:01:00 PM
#22:


Personally, I'm just not that into paintings.

If I were super rich I could imagine myself turning into a collector of rare books/first editions/etc...
... Copied to Clipboard!
Lopen
07/10/11 2:03:00 PM
#23:


Hell no. Half of the highest priced ones look like they could've been done by a four year old. <_< The Van Goghs on the other hand require more talent, requiring said four year old to take hallucinogenic drugs first.

Course I realize how good they look is not really why they're priced so highly, but yeah. I just don't "get" "art."

I swear it's just a scheme by the fat cats to give the impression they contribute something of value to society by owning these things instead of doing things that are actually useful with their money and resources. Or something. It must be!

--
No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!
I actually do kinda like some of Van Gogh's stuff, but that doesn't mean I can't make f
... Copied to Clipboard!
Surskit
07/10/11 2:18:00 PM
#24:


It's a status thing. Maybe to show off you power or wealth. People who buy this stuff probably don't give a crap what these paintings actually look like.

--
.-#Elements of Water#-.
... Copied to Clipboard!
TehRYNOL
07/10/11 2:21:00 PM
#25:


My math teacher told me before that he'd pay around 50 USD max for the Mona Lisa if he ever got the chance. That's the most it'd ever be worth to him. If I had enough money to blow I'd waste at most 1000 USD and that's it. I just don't see how a painting could be worth over 1 000 000 USD.

--
RIP Nate Dogg | PSN: Gowow20
Not changing sig until Dr. Dre releases Detox! Started: October 13th 2009
... Copied to Clipboard!
Liquid Wind
07/10/11 2:22:00 PM
#26:


My math teacher told me before that he'd pay around 50 USD max for the Mona Lisa if he ever got the chance. That's the most it'd ever be worth to him. If I had enough money to blow I'd waste at most 1000 USD and that's it. I just don't see how a painting could be worth over 1 000 000 USD.

rich people don't buy things to enjoy them, they buy things to show other rich people how rich they are

humans are basically just technologically advanced monkeys when you get down to it
... Copied to Clipboard!
Punch_Sideiron
07/10/11 2:23:00 PM
#27:


Surskit posted...
It's a status thing. Maybe to show off you power or wealth.

See, I would never care about something like that, so that's why I wouldn't pay for it.

Plus, I like things to have function rather than just, "that looks cool and was painted by so-and-so."
... Copied to Clipboard!
voltch
07/10/11 2:23:00 PM
#28:


From: Surskit | #024
It's a status thing. Maybe to show off you power or wealth. People who buy this stuff probably don't give a crap what these paintings actually look like.


I disagree, I've met with some american collectors a lot of them really do care.

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
Punch_Sideiron
07/10/11 2:25:00 PM
#29:


voltch posted...
From: Surskit | #024
It's a status thing. Maybe to show off you power or wealth. People who buy this stuff probably don't give a crap what these paintings actually look like.
I disagree, I've met with some american collectors a lot of them really do care.


Of course collectors care. They're collectors. That's what they do.

I just don't think a lot of people buying these paintings for ridiculous amounts of money are actually collectors.
... Copied to Clipboard!
XIII_rocks
07/10/11 2:25:00 PM
#30:


PartOfYourWorld posted...
No. 5, 1948 by Jackson Pollock is currently the most expensive painting ever sold.

external image

...

I can probably rival this art with $10 worth of Taco Bell.


Post of the day

--
http://img.imgcake.com/22763810150194882301443717534644274676943735581nmu.jpg
... Copied to Clipboard!
voltch
07/10/11 2:28:00 PM
#31:


From: Punch_Sideiron | #029
voltch posted...
From: Surskit | #024
It's a status thing. Maybe to show off you power or wealth. People who buy this stuff probably don't give a crap what these paintings actually look like.
I disagree, I've met with some american collectors a lot of them really do care.


Of course collectors care. They're collectors. That's what they do.

I just don't think a lot of people buying these paintings for ridiculous amounts of money are actually collectors.




You'd be surprised. I mean these people make a ton of money doing things we can't do and they have hobbies which are different from playing games, like buying up works from great masters.

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
Punch_Sideiron
07/10/11 2:33:00 PM
#32:


voltch posted...
they have hobbies which are different from playing games, like buying up works from great masters.

As far as I'm concerned, they can keep their hobbies.

I prefer mine. Even with billions of dollars, I couldn't see that changing.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Surskit
07/10/11 2:35:00 PM
#33:


Collectors care about the fact they're valuable and rare, not what the actual piece is. If you just liked the Art, you could always buy a similar-looking piece or a clone for several billion less. It's still a status or ego-inflating thing. Maybe there's like one collector out there who is totally obsessed with Pollock and would pay that much to have the original, but chances are he's not.

--
.-#Elements of Water#-.
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Real Truth
07/10/11 2:36:00 PM
#34:


Most of them are really cool. A couple are ass. It's funny how the highest priced one is complete ass.

external image

is incredibly awesome

This one

external image

even more so because the lighting is just outstanding.

Also,

external image

I find to be really interesting.

--
GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site. -CJayC
... Copied to Clipboard!
voltch
07/10/11 2:36:00 PM
#35:


and what makes you think you know how the minds of these guys work?

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
Biolizard28
07/10/11 2:36:00 PM
#36:


No, at least, if it's for a personal collection.

If it's for a gallery with paid admissions, then I'd say it's a better trade.

--
I like how each new topic you make reveals such varied facets of your idiocy. - foolmo
Now this is entertainment!
... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke
07/10/11 2:47:00 PM
#37:


Half of the highest priced ones look like they could've been done by a four year old. <_<

Please become knowledgeable about modern/abstract art.

--
Full rap metal jacket ~ Method Man
... Copied to Clipboard!
Punch_Sideiron
07/10/11 2:49:00 PM
#38:


Mr Lasastryke posted...
Please become knowledgeable about modern/abstract art.



Couldn't help it.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Ayuyu
07/10/11 2:49:00 PM
#39:


Never, while I do appreciate the quality of most famous work of art and can totally understand the reason why they're so famous in the first place I still don't find them appealing to the eye and I sure ain't gonna pay for things I find ugly, not that kind of money anyway.

--
Best LPer ever, Gix ! : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt5YKmP7ecY
... Copied to Clipboard!
Pianist
07/10/11 2:52:00 PM
#40:


yes

not that i'd buy them myself, but they are

--
I'm always serious. Otherwise, no one will take me seriously.
... Copied to Clipboard!
voltch
07/10/11 2:52:00 PM
#41:


Yay!

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
Punch_Sideiron
07/10/11 2:53:00 PM
#42:


voltch posted...
Yay!

Planning to sell paintings?
... Copied to Clipboard!
voltch
07/10/11 2:54:00 PM
#43:


Oh I could never sell our family heirlooms.

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
Biolizard28
07/10/11 2:54:00 PM
#44:


Mr Lasastryke posted...
Please become knowledgeable about modern/abstract art.

He's not wrong.

--
I like how each new topic you make reveals such varied facets of your idiocy. - foolmo
Now this is entertainment!
... Copied to Clipboard!
shadosneko
07/10/11 2:59:00 PM
#45:


If I were a billionaire, I would probably pay a few million for original Louis Wain pictures.

--
http://backloggery.com/shados
http://last.fm/user/ShadosNeko
... Copied to Clipboard!
voltch
07/10/11 3:00:00 PM
#46:


Ya know for those who buy paintings for the rather cynical reasons stated, they are plenty of them, but I also think many of them would baulk at the real top stuff, since those prices are where it would start to become something serious.

The top art buyers are usually fairly eccentric so its very possible that they see something in those paintings that they think is worth 100million.

--
Vote for this guy in every contest: Sess
... Copied to Clipboard!
RayDyn
07/10/11 3:03:00 PM
#47:


From: Mr Lasastryke | Posted: 7/10/2011 5:47:44 PM | #037
Please become knowledgeable about ...abstract art.


My issue with abstract art, and it's pretty much only abstract art I take issue with, is most of it, really doesn't take any talent. Take Pollock's No.5... Does it really take any talent or skill to drizzle different colors of paint on an 8' x 4' sheet of fiber board? No, it takes a trip to Home Depot. There is another "painting" I don't remember the name of that is just a white canvas. Personally, I believe that laziness, boredom, and a "artists block" (for lack of a better term) created those.

Don't get me wrong, I actually like some modern art, graffiti art and street art are my favorite, my brother and his friends do both and I love their work. And I do make a distinction between the two.

--
Still a badass.
http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/5861/raydyn2.png http://img.imgcake.com/Raydynpngus.png
... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke
07/10/11 3:31:00 PM
#48:


Take Pollock's No.5... Does it really take any talent or skill to drizzle different colors of paint on an 8' x 4' sheet of fiber board?

Yes. It does.

I've actually seen some of Pollock's drip paintings. I can't even be bothered to argue this with you guys. So continue on with your "MY 4 YEAR OLD NEPHEW COULD DO THIS ROFLTHELOLXFD," I'm done.

--
Full rap metal jacket ~ Method Man
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Real Truth
07/10/11 3:32:00 PM
#49:


It doesn't matter if it takes talent when it literally looks like ass.

Doug actually did a hilarious episode about abstract art. Some can be great. That one, is definitely not.

--
GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site. -CJayC
... Copied to Clipboard!
JaKyL25
07/10/11 3:33:00 PM
#50:


I don't even put anything up as decoration, because I prefer just living with blank walls painted a solid color.

So no.

--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero.
http://i.neoseeker.com/n/2/nintendo_quality_seal.jpg
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1, 2