Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 19:22:41 GMT 1, Oh dear my post hit a raw nerve? Should i be scared and be on thr look out for a posh cheapie who wears brogues without socks from now on? How very street!! No raw nerve srappy-doo... Just hate little hemmoroids like you who come on here and spit venom behind the sheild of a computer. As for my brogues, the fact that i wear brogues and no socks should tell you i don't need to dress a certain way in order for punks like you think i'm tough... In the words of my man Big... N*ggas think i'm pu**y i dare you to stick your d**k in this....
Oh dear my post hit a raw nerve? Should i be scared and be on thr look out for a posh cheapie who wears brogues without socks from now on? How very street!! No raw nerve srappy-doo... Just hate little hemmoroids like you who come on here and spit venom behind the sheild of a computer. As for my brogues, the fact that i wear brogues and no socks should tell you i don't need to dress a certain way in order for punks like you think i'm tough... In the words of my man Big... N*ggas think i'm pu**y i dare you to stick your d**k in this.... Of course i didnt posterboy!! Great being a gangsta behind a screen isn't it? |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 19:22:48 GMT 1, So someone buys something you'd have liked, then sells it before they have even got it, trousers $250 and you owe them one? Everyone in the world apart from me is going mad.... 
So someone buys something you'd have liked, then sells it before they have even got it, trousers $250 and you owe them one? Everyone in the world apart from me is going mad.... Or it's just you? |
|
|
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by greatplainsman on Oct 4, 2014 19:24:34 GMT 1, Just trying to get something I Love. Yes. I would be very appreciative. Sorry we don't think alike, but please refrain from negativity in this thread. Thx.
Just trying to get something I Love. Yes. I would be very appreciative. Sorry we don't think alike, but please refrain from negativity in this thread. Thx.
|
|
Petrusino
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,103
👍🏻 545
November 2011
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Petrusino on Oct 4, 2014 19:26:38 GMT 1, I sold here on the forum many prints at cost and many other below cost, and on many others I have also gained. What I think about flippers?? People should flipp only prints that I already own; When people flipp prints that I already have in my collection I feel very satisfied; the higher is the price the more I feel satisfied...but only for the ones I already have in my collections. lol
I sold here on the forum many prints at cost and many other below cost, and on many others I have also gained. What I think about flippers?? People should flipp only prints that I already own; When people flipp prints that I already have in my collection I feel very satisfied; the higher is the price the more I feel satisfied...but only for the ones I already have in my collections. lol
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 19:28:46 GMT 1, Dss - i have been around on this forum since the beginning (under many guises), those good deeds are few and far between these days. Flipping art has been around since the first time someone put a price tag on one. Seems to be those who moan the most about flipping are the noobs - those that have been here since 2006 know better!!
Dss - i have been around on this forum since the beginning (under many guises), those good deeds are few and far between these days. Flipping art has been around since the first time someone put a price tag on one. Seems to be those who moan the most about flipping are the noobs - those that have been here since 2006 know better!! why have you switched "guises"? so many times? make some enemies I reckon? |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 19:29:20 GMT 1, I truly hope you get what you want and I accept that you will have to pay above cost, that's the only negative?
And DSS111, it's not me, it's all the others. Of this I am certain, not a shred of doubt!
I truly hope you get what you want and I accept that you will have to pay above cost, that's the only negative?
And DSS111, it's not me, it's all the others. Of this I am certain, not a shred of doubt!
|
|
|
|
sgolby
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,890
👍🏻 2,892
November 2012
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by sgolby on Oct 4, 2014 19:29:21 GMT 1, No raw nerve srappy-doo... Just hate little hemmoroids like you who come on here and spit venom behind the sheild of a computer. As for my brogues, the fact that i wear brogues and no socks should tell you i don't need to dress a certain way in order for punks like you think i'm tough... In the words of my man Big... N*ggas think i'm pu**y i dare you to stick your d**k in this.... Of course i didnt posterboy!! Great being a gangsta behind a screen isn't it?
Never claimed to be a gangster, just pretty certain i could wipe the floor with you. Anyways i am done now. Quittig smoking turns me ito a mean person from time to time. Sorry for bringing down the forum for a second, folks.
No raw nerve srappy-doo... Just hate little hemmoroids like you who come on here and spit venom behind the sheild of a computer. As for my brogues, the fact that i wear brogues and no socks should tell you i don't need to dress a certain way in order for punks like you think i'm tough... In the words of my man Big... N*ggas think i'm pu**y i dare you to stick your d**k in this.... Of course i didnt posterboy!! Great being a gangsta behind a screen isn't it? Never claimed to be a gangster, just pretty certain i could wipe the floor with you. Anyways i am done now. Quittig smoking turns me ito a mean person from time to time. Sorry for bringing down the forum for a second, folks. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 19:32:29 GMT 1, Dss - i have been around on this forum since the beginning (under many guises), those good deeds are few and far between these days. Flipping art has been around since the first time someone put a price tag on one. Seems to be those who moan the most about flipping are the noobs - those that have been here since 2006 know better!! why have you switched "guises"? so many times? make some enemies I reckon?
Dss - i have been around on this forum since the beginning (under many guises), those good deeds are few and far between these days. Flipping art has been around since the first time someone put a price tag on one. Seems to be those who moan the most about flipping are the noobs - those that have been here since 2006 know better!! why have you switched "guises"? so many times? make some enemies I reckon? Busted, you know me so well!! |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 19:34:24 GMT 1, why have you switched "guises"? so many times? make some enemies I reckon? Busted, you know me so well!!
oh, and plenty of people on here help each other out. there's good left in this world after all
why have you switched "guises"? so many times? make some enemies I reckon? Busted, you know me so well!! i'll take that as a yes? oh, and plenty of people on here help each other out. there's good left in this world after all |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 19:34:27 GMT 1, Of course i didnt posterboy!! Great being a gangsta behind a screen isn't it? Never claimed to be a gangster, just pretty certain i could wipe the floor with you. Anyways i am done now. Quittig smoking turns me ito a mean person from time to time. Sorry for bringing down the forum for a second, folks.
Of course i didnt posterboy!! Great being a gangsta behind a screen isn't it? Never claimed to be a gangster, just pretty certain i could wipe the floor with you. Anyways i am done now. Quittig smoking turns me ito a mean person from time to time. Sorry for bringing down the forum for a second, folks. Some people talk shit, some people do shit |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 19:39:14 GMT 1, Busted, you know me so well!! i'll take that as a yes? oh, and plenty of people on here help each other out. there's good left in this world after all
Busted, you know me so well!! i'll take that as a yes? oh, and plenty of people on here help each other out. there's good left in this world after all Yeah i give shit away too that i took a punt on and has no resale value!! |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 19:49:02 GMT 1, ' course you have sweetheart Love you to ducky (kisses)
"Oh you are awful ... but I like you"
' course you have sweetheart Love you to ducky (kisses) "Oh you are awful ... but I like you" |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 20:41:26 GMT 1, I never realised it was Bowie.
I thought it was a budgie.
I never realised it was Bowie.
I thought it was a budgie.
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 21:05:29 GMT 1, i'll take that as a yes? oh, and plenty of people on here help each other out. there's good left in this world after all Yeah i give s**t away too that i took a punt on and has no resale value!!
i'll take that as a yes? oh, and plenty of people on here help each other out. there's good left in this world after all Yeah i give s**t away too that i took a punt on and has no resale value!! You can stop projecting now. |
|
|
|
Hairbland
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,946
👍🏻 2,740
November 2010
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Hairbland on Oct 4, 2014 21:17:56 GMT 1, . Kaws and Os Gemeos seem to be the only 'urban artists' releasing prints at 'market value.' Being an urban artist and only releasing prints for $3,000+ also kind of makes you look like an ass, or - how do you say - not 'urban.'
Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists.
. Kaws and Os Gemeos seem to be the only 'urban artists' releasing prints at 'market value.' Being an urban artist and only releasing prints for $3,000+ also kind of makes you look like an ass, or - how do you say - not 'urban.' Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 21:22:03 GMT 1, . Kaws and Os Gemeos seem to be the only 'urban artists' releasing prints at 'market value.' Being an urban artist and only releasing prints for $3,000+ also kind of makes you look like an ass, or - how do you say - not 'urban.' Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists.
I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans.
. Kaws and Os Gemeos seem to be the only 'urban artists' releasing prints at 'market value.' Being an urban artist and only releasing prints for $3,000+ also kind of makes you look like an ass, or - how do you say - not 'urban.' Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans. |
|
nighthawk
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,338
👍🏻 1,219
February 2013
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by nighthawk on Oct 5, 2014 0:48:49 GMT 1, Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans.
Right!
So why would they (artists) raise the price of the prints just so that a FEW people don't flip them (as many have suggested as a means of trying to eliminate flipping)? Most of these are going to collectors, and this one wasn't super cheap either. I'd say on par with any of the going "urban" artists releasing prints these days.
If you double the price right out of the gate, just so that a FEW aren't flipped immediately, aren't you also preventing quite a few collectors from being able to get one as they may not be able to afford it?? I say live with it, try your best, and move on (to the next print) people!
I think POW did a smash up job of a print release. Large run so that more people have a chance, only gave out the drop info the morning of, limited prints to one-per-household only, AND their website held up! Doesn't get much better than that folks.
Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans. Right! So why would they (artists) raise the price of the prints just so that a FEW people don't flip them (as many have suggested as a means of trying to eliminate flipping)? Most of these are going to collectors, and this one wasn't super cheap either. I'd say on par with any of the going "urban" artists releasing prints these days. If you double the price right out of the gate, just so that a FEW aren't flipped immediately, aren't you also preventing quite a few collectors from being able to get one as they may not be able to afford it?? I say live with it, try your best, and move on (to the next print) people! I think POW did a smash up job of a print release. Large run so that more people have a chance, only gave out the drop info the morning of, limited prints to one-per-household only, AND their website held up! Doesn't get much better than that folks. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 1:03:13 GMT 1, Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans.
Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans. Prints to the less-well-off fans, but originals to the exclusively rich. |
|
Hairbland
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,946
👍🏻 2,740
November 2010
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Hairbland on Oct 5, 2014 3:27:07 GMT 1, Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans.
That's cool, I respect your opinion. But I disagree. If you were a fan you were there earlier in an artist's career, and you were able to buy affordable art and support them.
But to expect those doing it for years, and are at the top of their game to throw out cheap art for late adopters is absurd. KAWS and Os Gemeos to name two owe nothing to anyone at this point IMHO. Those who joined late can buy a poster - KAWS had a nice limited poster from his Philadelphia museum show available for $100.
Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans. That's cool, I respect your opinion. But I disagree. If you were a fan you were there earlier in an artist's career, and you were able to buy affordable art and support them. But to expect those doing it for years, and are at the top of their game to throw out cheap art for late adopters is absurd. KAWS and Os Gemeos to name two owe nothing to anyone at this point IMHO. Those who joined late can buy a poster - KAWS had a nice limited poster from his Philadelphia museum show available for $100. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 3:43:27 GMT 1, I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans. That's cool, I respect your opinion. But I disagree. If you were a fan you were there earlier in an artist's career, and you were able to buy affordable art and support them. But to expect those doing it for years, and are at the top of their game to throw out cheap art for late adopters is absurd. KAWS and Os Gemeos to name two owe nothing to anyone at this point IMHO. Those who joined late can buy a poster - KAWS had a nice limited poster from his Philadelphia museum show available for $100.
I also respectfully disagree. A lot of fans simply do not become aware of a certain artist until they hear about it from a fellow art lover; there are so many artists out there. This is sort of like the whole 'true fans' of bands thing; I think it's more about how long you stick with them, or how much faith you have in them, than at what point in time you managed to catch on.
And I'm not saying that Kaws or Os Gemeos or anyone should release cheaper prints because they owe people anything; just that it's a certain way of approaching your art career and acknowledging that you have a fan base that largely cannot afford your art due to your success. Simply a nice thing to do, and seems particularly called for in urban art where - by nature - the majority of your fanbase is not likely to have large amounts of wealth.
I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans. That's cool, I respect your opinion. But I disagree. If you were a fan you were there earlier in an artist's career, and you were able to buy affordable art and support them. But to expect those doing it for years, and are at the top of their game to throw out cheap art for late adopters is absurd. KAWS and Os Gemeos to name two owe nothing to anyone at this point IMHO. Those who joined late can buy a poster - KAWS had a nice limited poster from his Philadelphia museum show available for $100. I also respectfully disagree. A lot of fans simply do not become aware of a certain artist until they hear about it from a fellow art lover; there are so many artists out there. This is sort of like the whole 'true fans' of bands thing; I think it's more about how long you stick with them, or how much faith you have in them, than at what point in time you managed to catch on. And I'm not saying that Kaws or Os Gemeos or anyone should release cheaper prints because they owe people anything; just that it's a certain way of approaching your art career and acknowledging that you have a fan base that largely cannot afford your art due to your success. Simply a nice thing to do, and seems particularly called for in urban art where - by nature - the majority of your fanbase is not likely to have large amounts of wealth. |
|
disdig1
New Member
🗨️ 534
👍🏻 366
October 2011
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by disdig1 on Oct 5, 2014 4:39:08 GMT 1, the entitlement is always funny here. artists don't owe you anything, their job is to make art and get paid doing it. if you worked hard at your chosen profession for a really long time and had an opportunity to make more money wouldn't you do that?
the entitlement is always funny here. artists don't owe you anything, their job is to make art and get paid doing it. if you worked hard at your chosen profession for a really long time and had an opportunity to make more money wouldn't you do that?
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 5:02:40 GMT 1, the entitlement is always funny here. artists don't owe you anything, their job is to make art and get paid doing it. if you worked hard at your chosen profession for a really long time and had an opportunity to make more money wouldn't you do that?
Not saying any artist owes people anything, nor does anyone with vast wealth. I will say that it is a show of great character and moral integrity when someone performs unnecessary acts of charity (which are inherently unnecessary, more or less). You could argue that an extremely successful artist releasing an inexpensive print for less-wealthy fans is a form of charity.
I also think being an artist by profession - rather than choosing another career path - sort of seems at odds with being motivated by money/wealth. I understand views on money almost always change as one gains wealth or has opportunities to amass more, but I enjoy artists that can resist this change as it makes them appear to be more genuine artists; i.e. creating art for art's sake. The whole 'art is for the people' thing.
At the same time, I can see why someone like Banksy abandoned the print game; doesn't fit with his MO, and his version of 'art for the people' is doing street pieces and public art, or charity canvases. Almost like he understands the role that prints are supposed to serve in the art world, and realizes that it is no longer applicable to him as an artist, as he seems to prefer spreading messages and social awareness via his art, and does not like it viewed as a commodity (nor the entire concept of an 'art market.')
the entitlement is always funny here. artists don't owe you anything, their job is to make art and get paid doing it. if you worked hard at your chosen profession for a really long time and had an opportunity to make more money wouldn't you do that? Not saying any artist owes people anything, nor does anyone with vast wealth. I will say that it is a show of great character and moral integrity when someone performs unnecessary acts of charity (which are inherently unnecessary, more or less). You could argue that an extremely successful artist releasing an inexpensive print for less-wealthy fans is a form of charity. I also think being an artist by profession - rather than choosing another career path - sort of seems at odds with being motivated by money/wealth. I understand views on money almost always change as one gains wealth or has opportunities to amass more, but I enjoy artists that can resist this change as it makes them appear to be more genuine artists; i.e. creating art for art's sake. The whole 'art is for the people' thing. At the same time, I can see why someone like Banksy abandoned the print game; doesn't fit with his MO, and his version of 'art for the people' is doing street pieces and public art, or charity canvases. Almost like he understands the role that prints are supposed to serve in the art world, and realizes that it is no longer applicable to him as an artist, as he seems to prefer spreading messages and social awareness via his art, and does not like it viewed as a commodity (nor the entire concept of an 'art market.') |
|
|
|
|
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by maddoghoek100 on Oct 5, 2014 5:22:02 GMT 1, on this i think you are just incorrect. im not sure which artists you admire, but all of the ones i admire love what they do and are working their butts off to support themselves and their families doing it. I would not begrudge them financial security for themselves and their families one bit. Every artist wants to do what they love, that is true. Most do it until they can no longer financially sustain themselves or their family. Most never actually make a living doing art
Some lawyers take cases pro bono to give back to their communities, some accountants do work for free for non profits, Some artists choose to give back by supporting and promoting young artists, doing large scale public art projects at a loss, sponsoring group shows, or contributing in a hundred other ways. Im not sure expecting them to sell art prints at below market to new found fair weather fans is reasonable.
Established artists will find projects that keep both new and old fans happy. Some will try to to create a class of entry level pieces like Faile has done with the 150s. Others will choose entirely different paths. If you like an artist you can not afford, buy their hard cover coffee table book and pick a new artist that is struggling and buy an original from him/her. You might pay their rent this month. I have a whole shelf of signed hard cover books and a wall filled with beautiful originals from artists that i hope you one day know the name of.
Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans.
on this i think you are just incorrect. im not sure which artists you admire, but all of the ones i admire love what they do and are working their butts off to support themselves and their families doing it. I would not begrudge them financial security for themselves and their families one bit. Every artist wants to do what they love, that is true. Most do it until they can no longer financially sustain themselves or their family. Most never actually make a living doing art Some lawyers take cases pro bono to give back to their communities, some accountants do work for free for non profits, Some artists choose to give back by supporting and promoting young artists, doing large scale public art projects at a loss, sponsoring group shows, or contributing in a hundred other ways. Im not sure expecting them to sell art prints at below market to new found fair weather fans is reasonable. Established artists will find projects that keep both new and old fans happy. Some will try to to create a class of entry level pieces like Faile has done with the 150s. Others will choose entirely different paths. If you like an artist you can not afford, buy their hard cover coffee table book and pick a new artist that is struggling and buy an original from him/her. You might pay their rent this month. I have a whole shelf of signed hard cover books and a wall filled with beautiful originals from artists that i hope you one day know the name of. Or it just means you've been doing it for awhile to increasing notice and acclaim and have become successful. A goal of most artists. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans. |
|
Momo
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,034
👍🏻 601
March 2014
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Momo on Oct 5, 2014 5:41:20 GMT 1, Why/how is this thread still so active?? 43 pages is a bit much
Why/how is this thread still so active?? 43 pages is a bit much
|
|
sgolby
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,890
👍🏻 2,892
November 2012
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by sgolby on Oct 5, 2014 5:58:00 GMT 1, Why/how is this thread still so active?? 43 pages is a bit much
Why/how is this thread still so active?? 43 pages is a bit much It has taken many twists and turns my friend... many twists and turns... |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 6:09:59 GMT 1, on this i think you are just incorrect. im not sure which artists you admire, but all of the ones i admire love what they do and are working their butts off to support themselves and their families doing it. I would not begrudge them financial security for themselves and their families one bit. Every artist wants to do what they love, that is true. Most do it until they can no longer financially sustain themselves or their family. Most never actually make a living doing art Some lawyers take cases pro bono to give back to their communities, some accountants do work for free for non profits, Some artists choose to give back by supporting and promoting young artists, doing large scale public art projects at a loss, sponsoring group shows, or contributing in a hundred other ways. Im not sure expecting them to sell art prints at below market to new found fair weather fans is reasonable. Established artists will find projects that keep both new and old fans happy. Some will try to to create a class of entry level pieces like Faile has done with the 150s. Others will choose entirely different paths. If you like an artist you can not afford, buy their hard cover coffee table book and pick a new artist that is struggling and buy an original from him/her. You might pay their rent this month. I have a whole shelf of signed hard cover books and a wall filled with beautiful originals from artists that i hope you one day know the name of. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans.
I think the Faile 150 series is a good example of how an artist can easily give back/maintain integrity with their entire fanbase while still remaining successful and being able to get all the kinds of wealth that they would probably want/need.
Not saying artists should forever stay starving artists, at all; more that it seems more akin to an artists world-view - especially urban artists who largely portray images of social commentary best understood/digested by the mass public - to keep that portion of their fan base in mind. And it is relatively easy to do to just shoot off some less expensive prints for fans; just a nice gesture that reflects a certain mentality or outlook on being a successful artist.
And I'm certainly not saying that I expect any artist to do this, nor do they owe anyone anything; I just happen to prefer the ones who do based on the above rationale. The same way I prefer lawyers who take on pro bono work, etc.
on this i think you are just incorrect. im not sure which artists you admire, but all of the ones i admire love what they do and are working their butts off to support themselves and their families doing it. I would not begrudge them financial security for themselves and their families one bit. Every artist wants to do what they love, that is true. Most do it until they can no longer financially sustain themselves or their family. Most never actually make a living doing art Some lawyers take cases pro bono to give back to their communities, some accountants do work for free for non profits, Some artists choose to give back by supporting and promoting young artists, doing large scale public art projects at a loss, sponsoring group shows, or contributing in a hundred other ways. Im not sure expecting them to sell art prints at below market to new found fair weather fans is reasonable. Established artists will find projects that keep both new and old fans happy. Some will try to to create a class of entry level pieces like Faile has done with the 150s. Others will choose entirely different paths. If you like an artist you can not afford, buy their hard cover coffee table book and pick a new artist that is struggling and buy an original from him/her. You might pay their rent this month. I have a whole shelf of signed hard cover books and a wall filled with beautiful originals from artists that i hope you one day know the name of. I like to think that financial success - at least in terms of robust personal wealth - is not a goal of most artists. At least the artists that I admire. This seems to be one of the main differences in crossing into the multi-thousand dollar print realm; they know the prints are worth more, but they still choose to sell for less hoping that some of the prints might get into the hands of less-well-off fans. I think the Faile 150 series is a good example of how an artist can easily give back/maintain integrity with their entire fanbase while still remaining successful and being able to get all the kinds of wealth that they would probably want/need. Not saying artists should forever stay starving artists, at all; more that it seems more akin to an artists world-view - especially urban artists who largely portray images of social commentary best understood/digested by the mass public - to keep that portion of their fan base in mind. And it is relatively easy to do to just shoot off some less expensive prints for fans; just a nice gesture that reflects a certain mentality or outlook on being a successful artist. And I'm certainly not saying that I expect any artist to do this, nor do they owe anyone anything; I just happen to prefer the ones who do based on the above rationale. The same way I prefer lawyers who take on pro bono work, etc. |
|
pada1
New Member
🗨️ 628
👍🏻 427
August 2012
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by pada1 on Oct 5, 2014 7:31:19 GMT 1, As a first start, I guess we all like "street" artists who are performing outdoor and delivering Art, messages, etc. for the public for free.
Haven't most of the artists discussed in this forum started that way (and some continue still, like Invaders)?
Reading you all is very interesting because I think you all have good points and not much weak arguments.
I'm not gonna much add here, however the main problem here lays on the fact that we, as collector, want to own everything and we know we can't.
This new Invader prints from POW is another example and is not going to be the last.
As a first start, I guess we all like "street" artists who are performing outdoor and delivering Art, messages, etc. for the public for free.
Haven't most of the artists discussed in this forum started that way (and some continue still, like Invaders)?
Reading you all is very interesting because I think you all have good points and not much weak arguments.
I'm not gonna much add here, however the main problem here lays on the fact that we, as collector, want to own everything and we know we can't.
This new Invader prints from POW is another example and is not going to be the last.
|
|
Dungle
Junior Member
🗨️ 4,008
👍🏻 5,174
June 2011
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Dungle on Oct 5, 2014 11:40:28 GMT 1, the entitlement is always funny here. artists don't owe you anything, their job is to make art and get paid doing it. if you worked hard at your chosen profession for a really long time and had an opportunity to make more money wouldn't you do that? Not saying any artist owes people anything, nor does anyone with vast wealth. I will say that it is a show of great character and moral integrity when someone performs unnecessary acts of charity (which are inherently unnecessary, more or less). You could argue that an extremely successful artist releasing an inexpensive print for less-wealthy fans is a form of charity. I also think being an artist by profession - rather than choosing another career path - sort of seems at odds with being motivated by money/wealth. I understand views on money almost always change as one gains wealth or has opportunities to amass more, but I enjoy artists that can resist this change as it makes them appear to be more genuine artists; i.e. creating art for art's sake. The whole 'art is for the people' thing. At the same time, I can see why someone like Banksy abandoned the print game; doesn't fit with his MO, and his version of 'art for the people' is doing street pieces and public art, or charity canvases. Almost like he understands the role that prints are supposed to serve in the art world, and realizes that it is no longer applicable to him as an artist, as he seems to prefer spreading messages and social awareness via his art, and does not like it viewed as a commodity (nor the entire concept of an 'art market.')
I'm not sure if this is a serous post.
the entitlement is always funny here. artists don't owe you anything, their job is to make art and get paid doing it. if you worked hard at your chosen profession for a really long time and had an opportunity to make more money wouldn't you do that? Not saying any artist owes people anything, nor does anyone with vast wealth. I will say that it is a show of great character and moral integrity when someone performs unnecessary acts of charity (which are inherently unnecessary, more or less). You could argue that an extremely successful artist releasing an inexpensive print for less-wealthy fans is a form of charity. I also think being an artist by profession - rather than choosing another career path - sort of seems at odds with being motivated by money/wealth. I understand views on money almost always change as one gains wealth or has opportunities to amass more, but I enjoy artists that can resist this change as it makes them appear to be more genuine artists; i.e. creating art for art's sake. The whole 'art is for the people' thing. At the same time, I can see why someone like Banksy abandoned the print game; doesn't fit with his MO, and his version of 'art for the people' is doing street pieces and public art, or charity canvases. Almost like he understands the role that prints are supposed to serve in the art world, and realizes that it is no longer applicable to him as an artist, as he seems to prefer spreading messages and social awareness via his art, and does not like it viewed as a commodity (nor the entire concept of an 'art market.') I'm not sure if this is a serous post. |
|
Invaded 420
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,757
👍🏻 1,959
August 2013
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by Invaded 420 on Oct 5, 2014 12:37:16 GMT 1, Why/how is this thread still so active?? 43 pages is a bit much
its a joke. Most there's about 20 pages about banksy and loads of other random stuff
Why/how is this thread still so active?? 43 pages is a bit much its a joke. Most there's about 20 pages about banksy and loads of other random stuff |
|
BKBOI
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,882
👍🏻 1,694
January 2013
|
Invader Aladdin Sane Print, by BKBOI on Oct 5, 2014 13:06:00 GMT 1, anyone like waffles? heard invader loves em so much he made an edition of what he had for breakfast. were people offering twice the price after that one dropped?
anyone like waffles? heard invader loves em so much he made an edition of what he had for breakfast. were people offering twice the price after that one dropped?
|
|
