| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/15/2011 09:19:20 AM · #1 |
World's most expensive photo. Recently sold at Christie's for $3.89 Million USD. The previous highest priced photo is a diptych of the inside of a 99 cent store, which sold for $3.35 Million. Makes me give some thought to what we consider good photography, if these are or are not good photography, and why they appealed to someone enough to pay millions for them.
|
|
|
|
05/15/2011 09:22:39 AM · #2 |
| Marketing? Stupidity? LOL |
|
|
|
05/15/2011 09:53:26 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Marketing? Stupidity? LOL |
Excellent answer. |
|
|
|
05/15/2011 09:53:47 AM · #4 |
Umm that's what the market will bear? Of course it does help if you apply yourself, market yourself, and build a cohesive body of work. It's a foreign concept for those who's primary means of presenting work is to just toss the same old slab of used spagetti on the wall hoping this time it'll stick. That's stupidity.
|
|
|
|
05/15/2011 10:23:39 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
which sold for $3.35 Million. Makes me give some thought to what we consider good photography, if these are or are not good photography, and why they appealed to someone enough to pay millions for them. |
My guess is you can't just stop by your local art gallery and purchase a Cindy Sherman. This camera sold for $775,000. Did that purchase have any bearing on what you consider a good camera?
Message edited by author 2011-05-15 11:33:15.
|
|
|
|
05/15/2011 11:21:48 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
World's most expensive photo. Recently sold at Christie's for $3.89 Million USD. The previous highest priced photo is a diptych of the inside of a 99 cent store, which sold for $3.35 Million. Makes me give some thought to what we consider good photography, if these are or are not good photography, and why they appealed to someone enough to pay millions for them. |
You're not really in the realm of photography here. You're in the realm of the Art market, where Jackson Pollock rains supreme. This raises the question of whether you can accurately put a monetary value on a work of art, a question easily answered: no. The Art market is speculative, like all markets. One reason you buy a piece of art is because you're gambling that someone else will buy it for more $$$ later.
 yanko's example of the most expensive camera is particularly apt. There is a historical/contextual reason why Cindy Sherman's photo is worth so much. This photo is part of a series (series isn't the exact word: something between series and oeuvre) of photos that simulate movie stills... but the movies don't exist. This is her concept, her larger contribution to art. You can't separate the individual photo from that: it's part of the "value."
|
|
|
|
05/15/2011 11:46:17 AM · #7 |
Hell, I'd sell my entire archive for that price :)
|
|
|
|
05/15/2011 12:09:05 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Hell, I'd sell my entire archive for that price :) |
Well if DPC were the real world Got Cheese would probably fetch as much. Well, maybe a few years ago when you were banished. That would have upped the price.
|
|
|
|
05/15/2011 12:19:36 PM · #9 |
What ? You were kicked out? Why? I thought I was the only one to get permanently banned and then get a new trial !
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Hell, I'd sell my entire archive for that price :) |
Well if DPC were the real world Got Cheese would probably fetch as much. Well, maybe a few years ago when you were banished. That would have upped the price. |
|
|
|
|
05/16/2011 01:45:59 AM · #10 |
The public perception of "Value"
|
|
|
|
05/16/2011 01:46:11 AM · #11 |
The public perception of "Value"
|
|
|
|
05/16/2011 02:27:21 AM · #12 |
Value of her name, not the picture.. it could have been a apple on an stump and would have sold for tons. To me, that sort of thing is just stupid.. I mean good for her for whatever, but really its just all kind of silly.
Message edited by author 2011-05-16 02:27:31. |
|
|
|
05/16/2011 07:00:07 AM · #13 |
| I think I'm doing something wrong... I've never even sold anything for 1 million, much less 3! |
|
|
|
05/16/2011 10:30:56 AM · #14 |
| It's worth that much because someone is willing to pay that much. |
|
|
|
05/16/2011 11:36:05 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Hell, I'd sell my entire archive for that price :) |
Well if DPC were the real world Got Cheese would probably fetch as much. Well, maybe a few years ago when you were banished. That would have upped the price. |
Darn, I should've had someone hold an auction.
|
|
|
|
09/19/2011 09:51:59 AM · #16 |
| For $3.89 clams she could have at least thought up an image title... |
|
|
|
09/19/2011 10:33:20 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
It's worth that much because someone is willing to pay that much. |
Exactly. As the article explains, it wasn't so much the photo, but when you get two collectors battling it out for something, then it gets crazy. They both wanted to win. |
|
|
|
09/19/2011 10:53:32 AM · #18 |
As a long-time fan of Cindy Sherman and her work, I'd say it's worth every penny and I hope she got some of it.
Her 'body of work' is far more than the photography you see in the example given, but is, in its own way, represented by it.
For example, and perhaps one more easily understood, the ephemeral work of Andy Goldworthy is mostly represented by his photography of his creations. But, "it's just a photograph?" Of course not.
|
|
|
|
09/19/2011 11:21:30 AM · #19 |
| My questions is: what score would you have given it in a DPC challenge? |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/27/2025 08:18:25 AM EDT.
