#5584979 - 04/08/1201:54 AMRe: Lichtenstein Comic Inspired Art Estimated at $35-45 Million
tth2tth2 "I blame it on the low quality of the newbies that are joining the boards." --And with one swoop tth2 become the community crotchety old man. Damn kids today.
Loc: Hong Kong
Originally Posted By: *paull*
Originally Posted By: tth2
Just saw the news that Thomas Kinkade passed away at age 54. If not for this thread, I would have had no idea who Thomas Kinkade was. I think I liked it better that way.
The landfills of the world are breathing a little easier today.
Someone started a Kinkade thread in "General", and it`s shocking how many people on the boards apparently actually like his work!
It`s a thread worth checking out if only for the hilarious parodies of Kinkade`s work that are posted. Kinkade`s real Disney-influenced work is then posted, and it took me a while to realize that was the real thing and not more parodies.
I think art is so subjective, so it truly is what is one man or woman's "trash" is another one's "treasure"
That's my stance from an art appreciation, enjoyment and aesthetic perspective. So, I can't really name-call art fans on what they like and wha they don't like.
However, from the perspective of any of these pieces mentioned being hailed, critiqued and praised, it does sometimes seem odd when a "remix" so to speak of one person's original creation is reinterpreted with minor modifications and that new creation is somehow called "genius" and seen as uniquely original without much respect in a footnote reference to the original creation. At least even in the small pop culture world of comic books, most artists cite their inspiration with the notatin "after... (original artists name)" when lifting a layout or reimagining a previously drawn scene.
Also as far as the pricing and valuation, it does baffle me that some of the modern artists passing their "masterpieces" through the community can command the prices that they do. I guess in this free economy of supply/demand, more power to the marketers and let the buyer beware, so I can't fault them for accepting money people are gladly paying them.
#5586574 - 04/08/1209:42 PMRe: Lichtenstein Comic Inspired Art Estimated at $35-45 Million
delekkerstedelekkerste James Bond wears a Rolex...the rest is just product placement.
Loc: New York, NY
Originally Posted By: inovrmihd
Very intersting link. Gene, is there an end game for a contemporary art "investor" other than find a greater fool? Are there many documented cases of guys getting tax benefits by donating to museums, or selling their art to the company on whose board they sit? I am not talking about things like insurance fraud, but legal ways to liquidate this *spoon* (sorry if this question offends anyone).
I think the end game for most investors in art & collectibles (and any other non-income generating assets) is reselling at a higher price. At the high end of fine art (and perhaps some collectibles), donations to museums can be used to help offset income or estate taxes, but this is all heavily scrutinized and no one is able to game the system and come out ahead versus selling the art for personal gain. Far from being insidious, the art donations are pretty noble if you think about it - I don't know any comic book or OA collectors who would give their collections away and realize less than 50% of the value of their collections through tax savings.
In any case, I think most contemporary art is bought not for investment or with resale in mind, but rather because (1) it's used as decor, (2) the purchaser likes the art and/or (3) the purchaser wants to show off his wealth/status/taste.
_________________________ "No asset is so good that it can't become a bad investment if bought at too high a price." - Howard Marks
Price is what you pay, value is what you get.
It's better to be thought a fool than to open your wallet and remove all doubt.