Seems he just dropped another print. Independence day flag. Already sold out. Price of course was much better then the Marilyn print price.

I presume Guetta asked permission to use the Marilyn photo from whichever Hollywood studio or agency or photographer own the copyright.

I have to stand up and say that Southbound's statement " Regardless of Dface's current popularity on this board" is an unheralded and inaccurate stereotype and should have never been so pompously expressed. Yes, we all know that his Stolen Space gallery may have done a show representing a questionable artist, but let's not crucify him for one bad decision that I'm sure was executed with no malfeasance or intent to knowingly offend anybody's sensibilities. Yet, he personally continues to create wonderful murals and pretty fuckin' cool sold out print releases. I think there are not only a lot of forum members that still hold him in high regard, but many more outside this forum that do as well. I mean look, he just scored the album cover art for 'Blink 182' which I don't see any other artist doing things on that level. I think he continues to do great things and will keep amazing people in the future. I think his representation of D*Face is way of base. Oh yeah, congratulations "jfiks" on your purchase, you did make the right decision and a fabulous pick up.

Fortunately for Mr Brainwash, (and unfortunately for her estate), her image is in the public domain.

I should have clarified that I was referring to the specific image that both warhol and Mr Brainwash used is in the public domain. It was from a publicity still from her movie Niagara in 1953. It was not copyrighted (as most publicity stills weren't back then).

Ah a classic met takedown! Please indulge my point by point rebuttal as is the tradition around these parts. 

Art collectors fall into three categories: 1) Those who collect for the love of the art with no credence to value whatsoever, 2) Those who collect for both the love of art and with an eye towards smart investment, and 3) those who collect solely for investment purposes with little to no credence given to the artwork itself. You clearly fall into the fist category, and god bless you for it! Your posts are my favorite on this forum and your candor is always refreshing. I'm envious, as I fall squarely in the second category as likely do most people on this forum. 

My philosophy on collecting is that there are hundreds of millions of pieces of artwork on the market, so it would be foolish not to buy pieces that you love and are a smart investment. There will always be pieces that satisfy both categories. Thats just me, and I think its a smart approach (plus I'm a millennial that got screwed over by the recession and frankly don't trust the stock market). With that in mind, here are my thoughts on to your post. 

The remainder of the post is dissonance reduction. It serves to justify your act of condonation, i.e. paying money for one of the prints.

Absolutely! I'd say its more therapeutic, which in reality is all the posts on there. We find solace in sharing our thoughts on this is faceless platform, and work though conflicting emotions which are clearly on display in my "dissonance reduction." But that thought process in my post is what I go though before making every purchase, and IMHO so should every collector. We all far to often buy impulsively without taking into account whether there are smarter more sound alternatives available for the money. But then again I buy for love AND investment, and my outlook certainly isn't universal.  

Such a purchase offers financial support and moral encouragement to the very person responsible for releasing work which is "fully derivative and represents everything that's wrong with the current urban scene." It helps to further legitimise that person and their output. You, as facilitator and knowing colluder, are therefore the actual problem, along with the artist himself.

I concede this point. I am a big proponent in being conscious that we all "vote with our money" and even individual purchases have an impact. But, this is my first Mr Brainwash purchase, and I have actively resisted purchasing prints of his that I knew I could flip because of my distaste for his images. While this certainly doesn't justify my purchase, I think theres some redemption in the fact that I bought this to hang and my thoughts on investment were only towards the future should my tastes change.

It is an amoral, self-serving position which I consider more corrosive than blind ignorance, and maybe even stupidity.

Once again this opinion is one of a small cohort that buy ONLY for the love of the art. I don't think that I appreciate artwork any less then you, and a quick search of my posts will show that my main interest in this hobby is the intellectual appreciation and discussion of artwork. I don't find my position either corrosive or amoral. I like this image, and whether or not its Mr Brainwash I will enjoy it on my wall. Isn't such appreciation not what you champion? Tastes are different, I think that should be accepted. I realize its more my buying philosophy that you find corrosive, but once again why should we not spend our money on something that we love and is also a smart investment. As my posts outlines, this may be one of the smarter buys if you want a Marilyn image. Given its lack luster reception I may be incorrect, but thats just like my opinion, man. 

That said, although I detest much of what you've written, its candour is refreshing. Openness is far less tiresome than hypocrisy. 

Thank you! I strive to achieve a met -esq. level of candor in all of my posts. 

Perhaps what's therefore most off-putting about your text is its public nature and tone. I sense a certain shamelessness in the rationalisation of your purchase decision — which slowly, by increment, brings harm to the integrity of a broader art scene.

I disagree. I believe my post brings more integrity to the broader art scene by outlining what is I believe an informed tactic to art collecting in general. While you may disagree with this particular purchase, I challenge you to discredit my methodology. We all spend thousands of dollars on art every year, and I believe it is wise 
to take a moment before every purchase and determine whether the piece one is contemplating purchasing is both one that you will appreciate, is a smart investment, and if there are alternative pieces that your money would be better spent on. This reduces the risk of regretful purchases and allows for a profit once your tastes change and the time comes to sell. I've always wanted a Marilyn on the wall, I weighed my options, and found this to be a smart purchase. Am I contributing to the slow degradation of this scene? Maybe. But if anything, my thoughts on the subject may have encouraged people to forgo the purchase of the countless derivative images that are constantly released that has little to no artist or investment value. 

Personally, I find such uninspired stencil artwork (I won't name names) released every year much more corrosive. Sure, Mr Brainwash has his issues, but his strong secondary market arguably serves to help the urban scene as a whole by further legitimizing all urban artwork in the aggregate. Legitimacy is heavily based on collectable value. Is this a cold and calculated option? Defiantly! But its an honest look at an industry thats driven by the almighty dollar.

Ah a classic met takedown! Please indulge my point by point rebuttal as is the tradition around these parts. 

Art collectors fall into three categories: 1) Those who collect for the love of the art with no credence to value whatsoever, 2) Those who collect for both the love of art and with an eye towards smart investment, and 3) those who collect solely for investment purposes with little to no credence given to the artwork itself. You clearly fall into the fist category, and god bless you for it! Your posts are my favorite on this forum and your candor is always refreshing. I'm envious, as I fall squarely in the second category as likely do most people on this forum. 

My philosophy on collecting is that there are hundreds of millions of pieces of artwork on the market, so it would be foolish not to buy pieces that you love and are a smart investment. There will always be pieces that satisfy both categories. Thats just me, and I think its a smart approach (plus I'm a millennial that got screwed over by the recession and frankly don't trust the stock market). With that in mind, here are my thoughts on to your post. 

The remainder of the post is dissonance reduction. It serves to justify your act of condonation, i.e. paying money for one of the prints.

Absolutely! I'd say its more therapeutic, which in reality is all the posts on there. We find solace in sharing our thoughts on this is faceless platform, and work though conflicting emotions which are clearly on display in my "dissonance reduction." But that thought process in my post is what I go though before making every purchase, and IMHO so should every collector. We all far to often buy impulsively without taking into account whether there are smarter more sound alternatives available for the money. But then again I buy for love AND investment, and my outlook certainly isn't universal.  

Such a purchase offers financial support and moral encouragement to the very person responsible for releasing work which is "fully derivative and represents everything that's wrong with the current urban scene." It helps to further legitimise that person and their output. You, as facilitator and knowing colluder, are therefore the actual problem, along with the artist himself.

I concede this point. I am a big proponent in being conscious that we all "vote with our money" and even individual purchases have an impact. But, this is my first Mr Brainwash purchase, and I have actively resisted purchasing prints of his that I knew I could flip because of my distaste for his images. While this certainly doesn't justify my purchase, I think theres some redemption in the fact that I bought this to hang and my thoughts on investment were only towards the future should my tastes change.

It is an amoral, self-serving position which I consider more corrosive than blind ignorance, and maybe even stupidity.

Once again this opinion is one of a small cohort that buy ONLY for the love of the art. I don't think that I appreciate artwork any less then you, and a quick search of my posts will show that my main interest in this hobby is the intellectual appreciation and discussion of artwork. I don't find my position either corrosive or amoral. I like this image, and whether or not its Mr Brainwash I will enjoy it on my wall. Isn't such appreciation not what you champion? Tastes are different, I think that should be accepted. I realize its more my buying philosophy that you find corrosive, but once again why should we not spend our money on something that we love and is also a smart investment. As my posts outlines, this may be one of the smarter buys if you want a Marilyn image. Given its lack luster reception I may be incorrect, but thats just like my opinion, man. 

That said, although I detest much of what you've written, its candour is refreshing. Openness is far less tiresome than hypocrisy. 

Thank you! I strive to achieve a met -esq. level of candor in all of my posts. 

Perhaps what's therefore most off-putting about your text is its public nature and tone. I sense a certain shamelessness in the rationalisation of your purchase decision — which slowly, by increment, brings harm to the integrity of a broader art scene.

I disagree. I believe my post brings more integrity to the broader art scene by outlining what is I believe an informed tactic to art collecting in general. While you may disagree with this particular purchase, I challenge you to discredit my methodology. We all spend thousands of dollars on art every year, and I believe it is wise 
to take a moment before every purchase and determine whether the piece one is contemplating purchasing is both one that you will appreciate, is a smart investment, and if there are alternative pieces that your money would be better spent on. This reduces the risk of regretful purchases and allows for a profit once your tastes change and the time comes to sell. I've always wanted a Marilyn on the wall, I weighed my options, and found this to be a smart purchase. Am I contributing to the slow degradation of this scene? Maybe. But if anything, my thoughts on the subject may have encouraged people to forgo the purchase of the countless derivative images that are constantly released that has little to no artist or investment value. 

Personally, I find such uninspired stencil artwork (I won't name names) released every year much more corrosive. Sure, Mr Brainwash has his issues, but his strong secondary market arguably serves to help the urban scene as a whole by further legitimizing all urban artwork in the aggregate. Legitimacy is heavily based on collectable value. Is this a cold and calculated option? Defiantly! But its an honest look at an industry thats driven by the almighty dollar.

Yep, but I prefer this a lot to the 'Make Art Not War' work, don't you?

For me the Liberté, égalité, fraternité is a lot more poignant following the tragedy that took place in France and echoes similar events around the World.

In my opinion it will go down as one of his classics. Almost as if the other works/recycles were 'works in progress' until he arrived here. But that's just me.

Ah a classic met takedown! Please indulge my point by point rebuttal as is the tradition around these parts. 

Art collectors fall into three categories: 1) Those who collect for the love of the art with no credence to value whatsoever, 2) Those who collect for both the love of art and with an eye towards smart investment, and 3) those who collect solely for investment purposes with little to no credence given to the artwork itself. You clearly fall into the fist category, and god bless you for it! Your posts are my favorite on this forum and your candor is always refreshing. I'm envious, as I fall squarely in the second category as likely do most people on this forum. 

My philosophy on collecting is that there are hundreds of millions of pieces of artwork on the market, so it would be foolish not to buy pieces that you love and are a smart investment. There will always be pieces that satisfy both categories. Thats just me, and I think its a smart approach (plus I'm a millennial that got screwed over by the recession and frankly don't trust the stock market). With that in mind, here are my thoughts on to your post. 

The remainder of the post is dissonance reduction. It serves to justify your act of condonation, i.e. paying money for one of the prints.

Absolutely! I'd say its more therapeutic, which in reality is all the posts on there. We find solace in sharing our thoughts on this is faceless platform, and work though conflicting emotions which are clearly on display in my "dissonance reduction." But that thought process in my post is what I go though before making every purchase, and IMHO so should every collector. We all far to often buy impulsively without taking into account whether there are smarter more sound alternatives available for the money. But then again I buy for love AND investment, and my outlook certainly isn't universal.  

Such a purchase offers financial support and moral encouragement to the very person responsible for releasing work which is "fully derivative and represents everything that's wrong with the current urban scene." It helps to further legitimise that person and their output. You, as facilitator and knowing colluder, are therefore the actual problem, along with the artist himself.

I concede this point. I am a big proponent in being conscious that we all "vote with our money" and even individual purchases have an impact. But, this is my first Mr Brainwash purchase, and I have actively resisted purchasing prints of his that I knew I could flip because of my distaste for his images. While this certainly doesn't justify my purchase, I think theres some redemption in the fact that I bought this to hang and my thoughts on investment were only towards the future should my tastes change.

It is an amoral, self-serving position which I consider more corrosive than blind ignorance, and maybe even stupidity.

Once again this opinion is one of a small cohort that buy ONLY for the love of the art. I don't think that I appreciate artwork any less then you, and a quick search of my posts will show that my main interest in this hobby is the intellectual appreciation and discussion of artwork. I don't find my position either corrosive or amoral. I like this image, and whether or not its Mr Brainwash I will enjoy it on my wall. Isn't such appreciation not what you champion? Tastes are different, I think that should be accepted. I realize its more my buying philosophy that you find corrosive, but once again why should we not spend our money on something that we love and is also a smart investment. As my posts outlines, this may be one of the smarter buys if you want a Marilyn image. Given its lack luster reception I may be incorrect, but thats just like my opinion, man. 

That said, although I detest much of what you've written, its candour is refreshing. Openness is far less tiresome than hypocrisy. 

Thank you! I strive to achieve a met -esq. level of candor in all of my posts. 

Perhaps what's therefore most off-putting about your text is its public nature and tone. I sense a certain shamelessness in the rationalisation of your purchase decision — which slowly, by increment, brings harm to the integrity of a broader art scene.

I disagree. I believe my post brings more integrity to the broader art scene by outlining what is I believe an informed tactic to art collecting in general. While you may disagree with this particular purchase, I challenge you to discredit my methodology. We all spend thousands of dollars on art every year, and I believe it is wise 
to take a moment before every purchase and determine whether the piece one is contemplating purchasing is both one that you will appreciate, is a smart investment, and if there are alternative pieces that your money would be better spent on. This reduces the risk of regretful purchases and allows for a profit once your tastes change and the time comes to sell. I've always wanted a Marilyn on the wall, I weighed my options, and found this to be a smart purchase. Am I contributing to the slow degradation of this scene? Maybe. But if anything, my thoughts on the subject may have encouraged people to forgo the purchase of the countless derivative images that are constantly released that has little to no artist or investment value. 

Personally, I find such uninspired stencil artwork (I won't name names) released every year much more corrosive. Sure, Mr Brainwash has his issues, but his strong secondary market arguably serves to help the urban scene as a whole by further legitimizing all urban artwork in the aggregate. Legitimacy is heavily based on collectable value. Is this a cold and calculated option? Defiantly! But its an honest look at an industry thats driven by the almighty dollar.