Newar
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,462
Likes โข 1,060
Member is Online
April 2018
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Newar on Mar 4, 2021 21:41:26 GMT 1, NFT is not about art but buisness that's it people behind are tech moghul's or from finance or big gallery's It's the new flipper paradise NFT are a new great opportinuty without any restriction yet Almine Rech is entering into with Cesar Piette
NFT is not about art but buisness that's it people behind are tech moghul's or from finance or big gallery's It's the new flipper paradise NFT are a new great opportinuty without any restriction yet Almine Rech is entering into with Cesar Piette
|
|
kuni
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,153
Likes โข 1,818
February 2018
|
NFT Vs Real art, by kuni on Mar 4, 2021 21:57:04 GMT 1, Is there any decent NFT art? It all looks like the shit you see in the walls of Amsterdam weed cafes, Aliens with joints and illuminous cats. Utter crap. I've been long term crypto investor and long since made my fair share however NFTs in there current incarnation are nothing but a Ponzi scheme promoted by the usual two bit grass smoking celebs who also promote THC and diet plans. In short, I'm out. For the most part no most of it's trash but there are a few exceptions including pieces by Emma Stern, Cesar Piette, Canyon Castator, Mad Dog Jones and there are others i'm forgetting. Shep has a piece dropping. There's a big difference between the larger money grab that is most "artists" launching open editions and people who do 1/1's.
Is there any decent NFT art? It all looks like the shit you see in the walls of Amsterdam weed cafes, Aliens with joints and illuminous cats. Utter crap. I've been long term crypto investor and long since made my fair share however NFTs in there current incarnation are nothing but a Ponzi scheme promoted by the usual two bit grass smoking celebs who also promote THC and diet plans. In short, I'm out. For the most part no most of it's trash but there are a few exceptions including pieces by Emma Stern, Cesar Piette, Canyon Castator, Mad Dog Jones and there are others i'm forgetting. Shep has a piece dropping. There's a big difference between the larger money grab that is most "artists" launching open editions and people who do 1/1's.
|
|
kuni
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,153
Likes โข 1,818
February 2018
|
NFT Vs Real art, by kuni on Mar 5, 2021 21:56:57 GMT 1, Ryan Travis Christian with a NFT on the auction block right now: superrare.co/artwork-v2/lucky-duck-20690
|
|
Lee Ellis Art
Artist
New Member
Posts โข 299
Likes โข 174
Member is Online
July 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Lee Ellis Art on Mar 8, 2021 15:17:39 GMT 1, I think it's an interesting time for the at world. I do think nothing beats a physical art work, but digital seems to be the way forward for some collectors. Most likely collectors already invested in crypto and perhaps like the idea of ownership without having physical pieces in their home. It's all quite surreal really. As an artist I think it's worth a punt. As a collector however, it's too early to say. I've recently minted a couple of pieces that originally started life as oil paintings and then transformed into something different in the digital realm. It's a bit of fun, if nothing else.
Does anyone own any crypto art yet?
I think it's an interesting time for the at world. I do think nothing beats a physical art work, but digital seems to be the way forward for some collectors. Most likely collectors already invested in crypto and perhaps like the idea of ownership without having physical pieces in their home. It's all quite surreal really. As an artist I think it's worth a punt. As a collector however, it's too early to say. I've recently minted a couple of pieces that originally started life as oil paintings and then transformed into something different in the digital realm. It's a bit of fun, if nothing else.
Does anyone own any crypto art yet?
|
|
jimmyjam
New Member
Posts โข 578
Likes โข 546
October 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by jimmyjam on Mar 8, 2021 15:46:12 GMT 1, NFTs could/will bring massive regulations to the crypto world, which is not what crypto people want. NFT is simply money laundering at the moment.
This is not going to end well.
So tweets are worth millions now? www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/07/tech/jack-dorsey-nft-twitter/index.html
Again whatโs to stop anyone from going around photographing everything making them into a NFT and calling it their own. I noticed that a few artists in NFTY Gateway were using other artists images as their own. Copyright is going to be a huge issue with all this.
NFTs could/will bring massive regulations to the crypto world, which is not what crypto people want. NFT is simply money laundering at the moment. This is not going to end well. So tweets are worth millions now? www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/07/tech/jack-dorsey-nft-twitter/index.htmlAgain whatโs to stop anyone from going around photographing everything making them into a NFT and calling it their own. I noticed that a few artists in NFTY Gateway were using other artists images as their own. Copyright is going to be a huge issue with all this.
|
|
Reader
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,266
Likes โข 2,821
June 2016
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Reader on Mar 8, 2021 15:53:44 GMT 1, NFTs could/will bring massive regulations to the crypto world, which is not what crypto people want. NFT is simply money laundering at the moment. This is not going to end well. So tweets are worth millions now? www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/07/tech/jack-dorsey-nft-twitter/index.htmlAgain whatโs to stop anyone from going around photographing everything making them into a NFT and calling it their own. I noticed that a few artists in NFT were using other artists images in their own. Copyright is going to be a huge issue with all this. Yep, already a spate of works that are just direct copies of other artists work, work photographed in situ and worked ripped off from instagram. As soon as copyright lawyers catch up with this, there'll be carnage.
NFTs could/will bring massive regulations to the crypto world, which is not what crypto people want. NFT is simply money laundering at the moment. This is not going to end well. So tweets are worth millions now? www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/07/tech/jack-dorsey-nft-twitter/index.htmlAgain whatโs to stop anyone from going around photographing everything making them into a NFT and calling it their own. I noticed that a few artists in NFT were using other artists images in their own. Copyright is going to be a huge issue with all this. Yep, already a spate of works that are just direct copies of other artists work, work photographed in situ and worked ripped off from instagram. As soon as copyright lawyers catch up with this, there'll be carnage.
|
|
|
jimmyjam
New Member
Posts โข 578
Likes โข 546
October 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by jimmyjam on Mar 8, 2021 16:09:06 GMT 1, It might be wise not to put any of your own work on instagram at the moment or any of your prints or art pieces you own.
Some jack ass might be going around screenshooting everything right now and making them into NFTs. The money being made of this MASSIVE SCAM is going to bring out the crazies. If you have a photo of a print with the edition number and signature you might want to take those off now or edit that information out. It sounds crazy and paranoid, it could be, but people do shitty and crazy things when they know they could make money off of it.
I can see people trying to make NFT COAs or art copies - for works they don't own and sell them.
This is going to bring a TON of money to lawyers and law makers in the next few months.
Tim Draper and The Winklevoss twins are getting way too greedy with all this. They did well with crypto coins but pushing this NFT, I think, will cause a very rude awakening to the entire crypto world.
Bay Area tech companies have made trillions off scamming people over the decades. It'll be interesting to watch these Billionaires try and lobby/pay off government officials around the world to make this scam work. I think I read Facebook has more lobbyists in Europe than they do anywhere in the world. Tim Draper, who is really pushing this NFTs, has a TON of power in the bay area and around the world. He will make another billion from this scam before it crashes. A name you should really remember. www.nytimes.com/2020/12/14/technology/big-tech-lobbying-europe.html
It might be wise not to put any of your own work on instagram at the moment or any of your prints or art pieces you own. Some jack ass might be going around screenshooting everything right now and making them into NFTs. The money being made of this MASSIVE SCAM is going to bring out the crazies. If you have a photo of a print with the edition number and signature you might want to take those off now or edit that information out. It sounds crazy and paranoid, it could be, but people do shitty and crazy things when they know they could make money off of it. I can see people trying to make NFT COAs or art copies - for works they don't own and sell them. This is going to bring a TON of money to lawyers and law makers in the next few months. Tim Draper and The Winklevoss twins are getting way too greedy with all this. They did well with crypto coins but pushing this NFT, I think, will cause a very rude awakening to the entire crypto world. Bay Area tech companies have made trillions off scamming people over the decades. It'll be interesting to watch these Billionaires try and lobby/pay off government officials around the world to make this scam work. I think I read Facebook has more lobbyists in Europe than they do anywhere in the world. Tim Draper, who is really pushing this NFTs, has a TON of power in the bay area and around the world. He will make another billion from this scam before it crashes. A name you should really remember. www.nytimes.com/2020/12/14/technology/big-tech-lobbying-europe.html
|
|
kuni
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,153
Likes โข 1,818
February 2018
|
NFT Vs Real art, by kuni on Mar 8, 2021 17:29:45 GMT 1, I think it's an interesting time for the at world. I do think nothing beats a physical art work, but digital seems to be the way forward for some collectors. Most likely collectors already invested in crypto and perhaps like the idea of ownership without having physical pieces in their home. It's all quite surreal really. As an artist I think it's worth a punt. As a collector however, it's too early to say. I've recently minted a couple of pieces that originally started life as oil paintings and then transformed into something different in the digital realm. It's a bit of fun, if nothing else. Does anyone own any crypto art yet? Given the reception NFT's have received here maybe I'm crazy for admitting that i do own a handful of pieces. Currently only own NFT's from artists who I was already a fan of the physical work. I'm dabbling. I don't see them going anyway anytime soon, but likely 95% of them (or more) will be worthless in 3 years.
I think it's an interesting time for the at world. I do think nothing beats a physical art work, but digital seems to be the way forward for some collectors. Most likely collectors already invested in crypto and perhaps like the idea of ownership without having physical pieces in their home. It's all quite surreal really. As an artist I think it's worth a punt. As a collector however, it's too early to say. I've recently minted a couple of pieces that originally started life as oil paintings and then transformed into something different in the digital realm. It's a bit of fun, if nothing else. Does anyone own any crypto art yet? Given the reception NFT's have received here maybe I'm crazy for admitting that i do own a handful of pieces. Currently only own NFT's from artists who I was already a fan of the physical work. I'm dabbling. I don't see them going anyway anytime soon, but likely 95% of them (or more) will be worthless in 3 years.
|
|
Lee Ellis Art
Artist
New Member
Posts โข 299
Likes โข 174
Member is Online
July 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Lee Ellis Art on Mar 8, 2021 17:33:28 GMT 1, I think it's an interesting time for the at world. I do think nothing beats a physical art work, but digital seems to be the way forward for some collectors. Most likely collectors already invested in crypto and perhaps like the idea of ownership without having physical pieces in their home. It's all quite surreal really. As an artist I think it's worth a punt. As a collector however, it's too early to say. I've recently minted a couple of pieces that originally started life as oil paintings and then transformed into something different in the digital realm. It's a bit of fun, if nothing else. Does anyone own any crypto art yet? Given the reception NFT's have received here maybe I'm crazy for admitting that i do own a handful of pieces. Currently only own NFT's from artists who I was already a fan of the physical work. I'm dabbling. I don't see them going anyway anytime soon, but likely 95% of them (or more) will be worthless in 3 years. Ha ha, brave admission. I can't see any harm in dabbling at this stage, especially in artists you already like. After all you buy what you like and it supports (as far as I'm aware) the artists and allows then to create more physical works. There are a lot of awful pieces out there though. I don't understand the vast majority and those particular pieces I can't see having any longevity at all. The rest though I imagine will be held in high esteem. What sites do you use? I'm trialling rarible.
I think it's an interesting time for the at world. I do think nothing beats a physical art work, but digital seems to be the way forward for some collectors. Most likely collectors already invested in crypto and perhaps like the idea of ownership without having physical pieces in their home. It's all quite surreal really. As an artist I think it's worth a punt. As a collector however, it's too early to say. I've recently minted a couple of pieces that originally started life as oil paintings and then transformed into something different in the digital realm. It's a bit of fun, if nothing else. Does anyone own any crypto art yet? Given the reception NFT's have received here maybe I'm crazy for admitting that i do own a handful of pieces. Currently only own NFT's from artists who I was already a fan of the physical work. I'm dabbling. I don't see them going anyway anytime soon, but likely 95% of them (or more) will be worthless in 3 years. Ha ha, brave admission. I can't see any harm in dabbling at this stage, especially in artists you already like. After all you buy what you like and it supports (as far as I'm aware) the artists and allows then to create more physical works. There are a lot of awful pieces out there though. I don't understand the vast majority and those particular pieces I can't see having any longevity at all. The rest though I imagine will be held in high esteem. What sites do you use? I'm trialling rarible.
|
|
jimmyjam
New Member
Posts โข 578
Likes โข 546
October 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by jimmyjam on Mar 8, 2021 17:45:47 GMT 1, How I Became a Professional NFT Artist "It took three hours, a partial understanding of some esoteric concepts, and $1,300, but I did it."
Great Article link
onezero.medium.com/how-i-became-a-professional-nft-artist-well-sort-of-d1597d2b3ddb
"What if I just uploaded old paintings that arenโt copyrighted? Would that be considered art?
Publications wrote that perhaps this incident represented the โtopโ of the NFT bubble โ for my sake, I hoped they were wrong.The idea of โart theftโ is controversial in the NFT world. Users have found accounts on Rarible that take other digital artistsโ art without permission, creating NFTs and attempting to sell them. Users diverge on where the lines should be drawn.
What about images that were in the public domain? What if I just uploaded old paintings that arenโt copyrighted? Would that be considered art?
Thinking this was my best idea yet, 10 minutes of internet sleuthing brought me to the Metropolitan Museum of Artโs โOpen Accessโ Program. They had uploaded over 400,000 images of art in the public domain and released all copyright claims on the pictures. They were free to be used in any form, for any reason, without attribution.
My next step was searching for โthe most famous work at the Met.โ Shortly, I had downloaded The Death Of Socrates. The optimist in me thought that uploading this could provide an interesting commentary on the lines of what constitutes art โ does reformatting something create something new? The realist in me thought it was the only way to upload something without breaking the rules.
File uploaded.
Next, I was asked if I wanted to create my own โcollectionโ or put it under the general โRarible collection.โ Figuring real art would have its own โcollection,โ I selected that option. Collection Name? This Is Not Art Description? These are very much not art."
Interesting article if you want to become a NFT artist in 3 hours.
Last thing - those who think people who don't understand NFTs are "old" or "old school"... just realize that mostly the main players behind NFTs (and crypto) are in their late 30's to 60's old men/women in silicon valley who have done these tech pump and dumps before, are very successful at it, and will make a billions off this before it crashes. Tim Draper is 62 and Winklevoss Twins are 39. The 20 years old are the ones flipping NFT art for a few hundred dollars while the "old" men/women in the bay area are make billions off this scam... NFT to me is being all done by the old players in tech not young 20 year olds.
How I Became a Professional NFT Artist "It took three hours, a partial understanding of some esoteric concepts, and $1,300, but I did it." Great Article link
onezero.medium.com/how-i-became-a-professional-nft-artist-well-sort-of-d1597d2b3ddb"What if I just uploaded old paintings that arenโt copyrighted? Would that be considered art? Publications wrote that perhaps this incident represented the โtopโ of the NFT bubble โ for my sake, I hoped they were wrong.The idea of โart theftโ is controversial in the NFT world. Users have found accounts on Rarible that take other digital artistsโ art without permission, creating NFTs and attempting to sell them. Users diverge on where the lines should be drawn. What about images that were in the public domain? What if I just uploaded old paintings that arenโt copyrighted? Would that be considered art? Thinking this was my best idea yet, 10 minutes of internet sleuthing brought me to the Metropolitan Museum of Artโs โOpen Accessโ Program. They had uploaded over 400,000 images of art in the public domain and released all copyright claims on the pictures. They were free to be used in any form, for any reason, without attribution. My next step was searching for โthe most famous work at the Met.โ Shortly, I had downloaded The Death Of Socrates. The optimist in me thought that uploading this could provide an interesting commentary on the lines of what constitutes art โ does reformatting something create something new? The realist in me thought it was the only way to upload something without breaking the rules. File uploaded. Next, I was asked if I wanted to create my own โcollectionโ or put it under the general โRarible collection.โ Figuring real art would have its own โcollection,โ I selected that option. Collection Name? This Is Not Art Description? These are very much not art." Interesting article if you want to become a NFT artist in 3 hours. Last thing - those who think people who don't understand NFTs are "old" or "old school"... just realize that mostly the main players behind NFTs (and crypto) are in their late 30's to 60's old men/women in silicon valley who have done these tech pump and dumps before, are very successful at it, and will make a billions off this before it crashes. Tim Draper is 62 and Winklevoss Twins are 39. The 20 years old are the ones flipping NFT art for a few hundred dollars while the "old" men/women in the bay area are make billions off this scam... NFT to me is being all done by the old players in tech not young 20 year olds.
|
|
kuni
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,153
Likes โข 1,818
February 2018
|
NFT Vs Real art, by kuni on Mar 8, 2021 18:25:03 GMT 1, Given the reception NFT's have received here maybe I'm crazy for admitting that i do own a handful of pieces. Currently only own NFT's from artists who I was already a fan of the physical work. I'm dabbling. I don't see them going anyway anytime soon, but likely 95% of them (or more) will be worthless in 3 years. Ha ha, brave admission. I can't see any harm in dabbling at this stage, especially in artists you already like. After all you buy what you like and it supports (as far as I'm aware) the artists and allows then to create more physical works. There are a lot of awful pieces out there though. I don't understand the vast majority and those particular pieces I can't see having any longevity at all. The rest though I imagine will be held in high esteem. What sites do you use? I'm trialling rarible. Agree the vast majority of the art on all of these platforms is rubbish and will be swept into the dustbin of history sooner rather than later. I think you're seeing a pretty low bar for what people are willing to purchase that should likely move towards higher and higher quality as more legit artists get into the space. For example, when Invader or Nava drop an NFT and it's $5k, it's going to make it a lot harder to justify spending $5k on Steve Nobodyface. There's also a massive discrepancy between physical and NFT that has to work itself out - people paying $200k for a 1/1 NFT when the artist sells a large canvas for $15k.
It's been eye opening to talk to digital natives in their twenties who would actually take a NFT over the physical equivalent. We can talk shit about it all we want, and i personally think it's ridiculous, but there are a lot of people out there for who this is the case. They don't have physical walls to display the work or their digital identity is more important to them than their physical. It's a wild dynamic that's easy to disregard that I'm trying to understand.
I've bought on niftygateway and open sea. I feel like superrare is where most of my favorite artists are setting up shop though, but haven't managed to purchase anything i've offered on. There are a fair # of the artists that many of us collect releasing NFT's.
There's a lot of price discovery going on so I want a little exposure to the space but not enough to make a difference if/when it implodes. i'm trying to take it slow and learn as much as i can about it.
Given the reception NFT's have received here maybe I'm crazy for admitting that i do own a handful of pieces. Currently only own NFT's from artists who I was already a fan of the physical work. I'm dabbling. I don't see them going anyway anytime soon, but likely 95% of them (or more) will be worthless in 3 years. Ha ha, brave admission. I can't see any harm in dabbling at this stage, especially in artists you already like. After all you buy what you like and it supports (as far as I'm aware) the artists and allows then to create more physical works. There are a lot of awful pieces out there though. I don't understand the vast majority and those particular pieces I can't see having any longevity at all. The rest though I imagine will be held in high esteem. What sites do you use? I'm trialling rarible. Agree the vast majority of the art on all of these platforms is rubbish and will be swept into the dustbin of history sooner rather than later. I think you're seeing a pretty low bar for what people are willing to purchase that should likely move towards higher and higher quality as more legit artists get into the space. For example, when Invader or Nava drop an NFT and it's $5k, it's going to make it a lot harder to justify spending $5k on Steve Nobodyface. There's also a massive discrepancy between physical and NFT that has to work itself out - people paying $200k for a 1/1 NFT when the artist sells a large canvas for $15k. It's been eye opening to talk to digital natives in their twenties who would actually take a NFT over the physical equivalent. We can talk shit about it all we want, and i personally think it's ridiculous, but there are a lot of people out there for who this is the case. They don't have physical walls to display the work or their digital identity is more important to them than their physical. It's a wild dynamic that's easy to disregard that I'm trying to understand. I've bought on niftygateway and open sea. I feel like superrare is where most of my favorite artists are setting up shop though, but haven't managed to purchase anything i've offered on. There are a fair # of the artists that many of us collect releasing NFT's. There's a lot of price discovery going on so I want a little exposure to the space but not enough to make a difference if/when it implodes. i'm trying to take it slow and learn as much as i can about it.
|
|
rungsp
New Member
Posts โข 153
Likes โข 192
February 2021
|
NFT Vs Real art, by rungsp on Mar 8, 2021 20:40:28 GMT 1, Matt Levine writes on Financial Markets stuff for Bloomberg. He is unusually witty, yet manages to explain the inexplicable at time.
Today:
A Banksy is cancelled I have mostly resisted writing about non-fungible tokens (NFTs), because they are not so much financial news as they are, uh, art news? The idea of an NFT is that you can buy sports memorabilia or art, but on the blockchain. Like there is a clip of LeBron James dunking a basketball, or a GIF of Nyan Cat, and they are more or less freely available on the internet, but you can buy a unique non-fungible copy of, or pointer to, the clip or the GIF proving that, in some sense, you own it. And that pointer is registered on a blockchain, and you can tell everyone โwell, sure, anyone can look at Nyan Cat, but I own the real one.โ Of course this is stupid but itโs not so much stupider than anything else. I can look at the Mona Lisa on my computer too, even though the Louvre owns the real one. Well, no, I do think there are some real advantages to owning physical paintings. Iโd rather have the original Mona Lisa in my living room than look at it on my computer. But the traditional markets for baseball cards and sports memorabilia are harder to distinguish from NFTs. The scuffed baseball that Barry Bonds hit into the stands for his 73rd home run in 2001 is not a particularly interesting physical object; you can buy a dozen nicer, newer, cleaner baseballs for $17.85 on Amazon. The home-run ball is a unique pointer to a memorable event, but it is not intuitively obvious that you should ascribe any value to that. A Mickey Mantle rookie card is a piece of cardboard with a picture and some stats printed on it, who cares. Why not print it on the blockchain. So, sure, NFTs, whatever. Still this is kind of nuts: Banksy isnโt the only person publicly destroying Banksy artworks now. In the latest stunt in the craze for NFTs (Non Fungible Tokens), which have captured the imagination of many digital enthusiasts and a growing sector of the art world, a company called Injective Protocol purchased a Banksy work and converted it into an NFTโand then burned it on video. Injective Protocol is a so-called DeFI (โdecentralized financeโ) platform that builds Wall Street-style derivatives using blockchain-based smart contracts. It bought Banksyโs Morons (White) (2006), depicting a crowded auction room with an ornately framed piece beside the auctioneer inscribed with the words โI canโt believe you morons actually buy this shit.โ โฆ In a video posted on the BurntBanksy Twitter account and on YouTube, a representative of the company explains that, come on, they had to burn the physical piece because, if it still existed, the value would remain primarily there, rather than in the digital asset. So you can buy a unique digital pointer to a physical work of art that does not exist. You can prove your exclusive ownership of the absence of a work of art. Great! The possibilities are dizzying. First, I have an incredibly amazing Banโno, not a Banksy, I have an incredibly amazing lost masterpiece of Michelangelo here in my living room but unfortunately I lit it on fire. I tried to record a video of it burning but I pushed the wrong button on my phone, so thereโs no video. I did succeed, however, in converting this rare and now permanently lost masterpiece into an NFT on the blockchain, and I will now sell it to you. It was a picture of a cat, if that helps. Second, I am going to sell a token that does not entitle you to ownership of the Mona Lisa. You can prove, on the blockchain, that you do not own the Mona Lisa, and that no one else does not own it in the unique way that you do not own it. I am going to record a video of me walking into the Louvre, and then walking out again half an hour later, and saying to the camera โyup the Mona Lisa is in there and I definitely do not have it.โ And then sell a token of โฆ that whole thing. Why not. Third, I am going to download the YouTube video of them burning that Banksy, then I am going to delete the YouTube video, and then I am going to sell a token giving you ownership to the deleted video. Fourth, I am going to sell tokens proving ownership, on the blockchain, of the same Banksy painting that they destroyed. Prove me wrong! You buy a token from Injective Protocol proving that you own that Banksy; your friend buys a token from me proving that she owns that Banksy. You say โno I own the real one.โ Your friend says โokay then go redeem your token for the painting.โ Youโre like โwell they burnt the painting.โ I think you lose this argument! But what do I know about art. Elsewhere Jack Dorsey is selling his first tweet as an NFT, sure. Weโre so close to a good idea here; what we need is for Dorsey to shut down Twitter and then sell an NFT of that.
Matt Levine writes on Financial Markets stuff for Bloomberg. He is unusually witty, yet manages to explain the inexplicable at time.
Today:
A Banksy is cancelled I have mostly resisted writing about non-fungible tokens (NFTs), because they are not so much financial news as they are, uh, art news? The idea of an NFT is that you can buy sports memorabilia or art, but on the blockchain. Like there is a clip of LeBron James dunking a basketball, or a GIF of Nyan Cat, and they are more or less freely available on the internet, but you can buy a unique non-fungible copy of, or pointer to, the clip or the GIF proving that, in some sense, you own it. And that pointer is registered on a blockchain, and you can tell everyone โwell, sure, anyone can look at Nyan Cat, but I own the real one.โ Of course this is stupid but itโs not so much stupider than anything else. I can look at the Mona Lisa on my computer too, even though the Louvre owns the real one. Well, no, I do think there are some real advantages to owning physical paintings. Iโd rather have the original Mona Lisa in my living room than look at it on my computer. But the traditional markets for baseball cards and sports memorabilia are harder to distinguish from NFTs. The scuffed baseball that Barry Bonds hit into the stands for his 73rd home run in 2001 is not a particularly interesting physical object; you can buy a dozen nicer, newer, cleaner baseballs for $17.85 on Amazon. The home-run ball is a unique pointer to a memorable event, but it is not intuitively obvious that you should ascribe any value to that. A Mickey Mantle rookie card is a piece of cardboard with a picture and some stats printed on it, who cares. Why not print it on the blockchain. So, sure, NFTs, whatever. Still this is kind of nuts: Banksy isnโt the only person publicly destroying Banksy artworks now. In the latest stunt in the craze for NFTs (Non Fungible Tokens), which have captured the imagination of many digital enthusiasts and a growing sector of the art world, a company called Injective Protocol purchased a Banksy work and converted it into an NFTโand then burned it on video. Injective Protocol is a so-called DeFI (โdecentralized financeโ) platform that builds Wall Street-style derivatives using blockchain-based smart contracts. It bought Banksyโs Morons (White) (2006), depicting a crowded auction room with an ornately framed piece beside the auctioneer inscribed with the words โI canโt believe you morons actually buy this shit.โ โฆ In a video posted on the BurntBanksy Twitter account and on YouTube, a representative of the company explains that, come on, they had to burn the physical piece because, if it still existed, the value would remain primarily there, rather than in the digital asset. So you can buy a unique digital pointer to a physical work of art that does not exist. You can prove your exclusive ownership of the absence of a work of art. Great! The possibilities are dizzying. First, I have an incredibly amazing Banโno, not a Banksy, I have an incredibly amazing lost masterpiece of Michelangelo here in my living room but unfortunately I lit it on fire. I tried to record a video of it burning but I pushed the wrong button on my phone, so thereโs no video. I did succeed, however, in converting this rare and now permanently lost masterpiece into an NFT on the blockchain, and I will now sell it to you. It was a picture of a cat, if that helps. Second, I am going to sell a token that does not entitle you to ownership of the Mona Lisa. You can prove, on the blockchain, that you do not own the Mona Lisa, and that no one else does not own it in the unique way that you do not own it. I am going to record a video of me walking into the Louvre, and then walking out again half an hour later, and saying to the camera โyup the Mona Lisa is in there and I definitely do not have it.โ And then sell a token of โฆ that whole thing. Why not. Third, I am going to download the YouTube video of them burning that Banksy, then I am going to delete the YouTube video, and then I am going to sell a token giving you ownership to the deleted video. Fourth, I am going to sell tokens proving ownership, on the blockchain, of the same Banksy painting that they destroyed. Prove me wrong! You buy a token from Injective Protocol proving that you own that Banksy; your friend buys a token from me proving that she owns that Banksy. You say โno I own the real one.โ Your friend says โokay then go redeem your token for the painting.โ Youโre like โwell they burnt the painting.โ I think you lose this argument! But what do I know about art. Elsewhere Jack Dorsey is selling his first tweet as an NFT, sure. Weโre so close to a good idea here; what we need is for Dorsey to shut down Twitter and then sell an NFT of that.
|
|
|
NFT Vs Real art, by collectorspain on Mar 9, 2021 9:41:28 GMT 1, Hello, I want to buy this pixel art image of sesame street and companion kaws: Link But I don't know how to do it or how much it is worth. Can anyone explain to me? I am new to this and I want to buy it
Hello, I want to buy this pixel art image of sesame street and companion kaws: LinkBut I don't know how to do it or how much it is worth. Can anyone explain to me? I am new to this and I want to buy it
|
|
kjg
Junior Member
Posts โข 4,344
Likes โข 6,308
Member is Online
December 2014
|
NFT Vs Real art, by kjg on Mar 9, 2021 9:48:12 GMT 1, Hello, I want to buy this pixel art image of sesame street and companion kaws: LinkBut I don't know how to do it or how much it is worth. Can anyone explain to me? I am new to this and I want to buy it It is pretty straight forward, isn't it?
Hello, I want to buy this pixel art image of sesame street and companion kaws: LinkBut I don't know how to do it or how much it is worth. Can anyone explain to me? I am new to this and I want to buy it It is pretty straight forward, isn't it?
|
|
|
Lee Ellis Art
Artist
New Member
Posts โข 299
Likes โข 174
Member is Online
July 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Lee Ellis Art on Mar 9, 2021 9:50:30 GMT 1, Ha ha, brave admission. I can't see any harm in dabbling at this stage, especially in artists you already like. After all you buy what you like and it supports (as far as I'm aware) the artists and allows then to create more physical works. There are a lot of awful pieces out there though. I don't understand the vast majority and those particular pieces I can't see having any longevity at all. The rest though I imagine will be held in high esteem. What sites do you use? I'm trialling rarible. Agree the vast majority of the art on all of these platforms is rubbish and will be swept into the dustbin of history sooner rather than later. I think you're seeing a pretty low bar for what people are willing to purchase that should likely move towards higher and higher quality as more legit artists get into the space. For example, when Invader or Nava drop an NFT and it's $5k, it's going to make it a lot harder to justify spending $5k on Steve Nobodyface. There's also a massive discrepancy between physical and NFT that has to work itself out - people paying $200k for a 1/1 NFT when the artist sells a large canvas for $15k. It's been eye opening to talk to digital natives in their twenties who would actually take a NFT over the physical equivalent. We can talk shit about it all we want, and i personally think it's ridiculous, but there are a lot of people out there for who this is the case. They don't have physical walls to display the work or their digital identity is more important to them than their physical. It's a wild dynamic that's easy to disregard that I'm trying to understand. I've bought on niftygateway and open sea. I feel like superrare is where most of my favorite artists are setting up shop though, but haven't managed to purchase anything i've offered on. There are a fair # of the artists that many of us collect releasing NFT's. There's a lot of price discovery going on so I want a little exposure to the space but not enough to make a difference if/when it implodes. i'm trying to take it slow and learn as much as i can about it. I agree that super rare seems to be where the better artists are. There's some interesting work around. The pricing is insane. I don't get understand how things are valued in this space. Part of me wonders if people are chancing it, can't be bothered to type in all the '0.000003354647' numbers or that fact the currency is so volatile that people are keeping it high in the expectation prices will drop. I'm a week in an still none the wiser.
Ha ha, brave admission. I can't see any harm in dabbling at this stage, especially in artists you already like. After all you buy what you like and it supports (as far as I'm aware) the artists and allows then to create more physical works. There are a lot of awful pieces out there though. I don't understand the vast majority and those particular pieces I can't see having any longevity at all. The rest though I imagine will be held in high esteem. What sites do you use? I'm trialling rarible. Agree the vast majority of the art on all of these platforms is rubbish and will be swept into the dustbin of history sooner rather than later. I think you're seeing a pretty low bar for what people are willing to purchase that should likely move towards higher and higher quality as more legit artists get into the space. For example, when Invader or Nava drop an NFT and it's $5k, it's going to make it a lot harder to justify spending $5k on Steve Nobodyface. There's also a massive discrepancy between physical and NFT that has to work itself out - people paying $200k for a 1/1 NFT when the artist sells a large canvas for $15k. It's been eye opening to talk to digital natives in their twenties who would actually take a NFT over the physical equivalent. We can talk shit about it all we want, and i personally think it's ridiculous, but there are a lot of people out there for who this is the case. They don't have physical walls to display the work or their digital identity is more important to them than their physical. It's a wild dynamic that's easy to disregard that I'm trying to understand. I've bought on niftygateway and open sea. I feel like superrare is where most of my favorite artists are setting up shop though, but haven't managed to purchase anything i've offered on. There are a fair # of the artists that many of us collect releasing NFT's. There's a lot of price discovery going on so I want a little exposure to the space but not enough to make a difference if/when it implodes. i'm trying to take it slow and learn as much as i can about it. I agree that super rare seems to be where the better artists are. There's some interesting work around. The pricing is insane. I don't get understand how things are valued in this space. Part of me wonders if people are chancing it, can't be bothered to type in all the '0.000003354647' numbers or that fact the currency is so volatile that people are keeping it high in the expectation prices will drop. I'm a week in an still none the wiser.
|
|
|
NFT Vs Real art, by collectorspain on Mar 9, 2021 10:02:01 GMT 1, Hello, I want to buy this pixel art image of sesame street and companion kaws: LinkBut I don't know how to do it or how much it is worth. Can anyone explain to me? I am new to this and I want to buy it Or maybe you just want to generate some traffic and push your own sale? Hello, Thanks for the answer, I am new to this and I want to know how wallets work. I am interested in buying that art, but I do not have an account in any wallet yet
Hello, I want to buy this pixel art image of sesame street and companion kaws: LinkBut I don't know how to do it or how much it is worth. Can anyone explain to me? I am new to this and I want to buy it Or maybe you just want to generate some traffic and push your own sale? Hello, Thanks for the answer, I am new to this and I want to know how wallets work. I am interested in buying that art, but I do not have an account in any wallet yet
|
|
kjg
Junior Member
Posts โข 4,344
Likes โข 6,308
Member is Online
December 2014
|
NFT Vs Real art, by kjg on Mar 9, 2021 10:06:29 GMT 1, Or maybe you just want to generate some traffic and push your own sale? Hello, Thanks for the answer, I am new to this and I want to know how wallets work. I am interested in buying that art, but I do not have an account in any wallet yet OK. Check out ethereum.org/en/eth/ and ethereum.org/en/get-eth/ for some more info.
Or maybe you just want to generate some traffic and push your own sale? Hello, Thanks for the answer, I am new to this and I want to know how wallets work. I am interested in buying that art, but I do not have an account in any wallet yet OK. Check out ethereum.org/en/eth/ and ethereum.org/en/get-eth/ for some more info.
|
|
Lee Ellis Art
Artist
New Member
Posts โข 299
Likes โข 174
Member is Online
July 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Lee Ellis Art on Mar 9, 2021 10:42:40 GMT 1, Or maybe you just want to generate some traffic and push your own sale? Hello, Thanks for the answer, I am new to this and I want to know how wallets work. I am interested in buying that art, but I do not have an account in any wallet yet There are lots of different wallets and not all link up to the various sites. I use coinable wallet and have attached it to rarible. I think it was said already, but Metamask works with Opensea. Not sure on sites such as Superrare though.
Or maybe you just want to generate some traffic and push your own sale? Hello, Thanks for the answer, I am new to this and I want to know how wallets work. I am interested in buying that art, but I do not have an account in any wallet yet There are lots of different wallets and not all link up to the various sites. I use coinable wallet and have attached it to rarible. I think it was said already, but Metamask works with Opensea. Not sure on sites such as Superrare though.
|
|
rockbeer
New Member
Posts โข 364
Likes โข 445
May 2006
|
NFT Vs Real art, by rockbeer on Mar 9, 2021 11:06:38 GMT 1, What do you actually get?
This is the key question. Apparently, in some cases at least, what you actually get is the knowledge that you, and you alone, 'own' a digital artefact that can be freely viewed, retained, redistributed, and potentially even resold (via subsequently-minted NFTs) by unlimited numbers of other people.
This whole thing is madness. I predict copyright carnage.
I think what you really get when you strip away all the bs is the knowledge that an entry exists in a distributed leger confirming that at some point you gave someone some amount of digital currency in exchange for an idea of 'ownership' that exists exclusively in your own mind.
It kind of reminds me of www.moonestates.com/
What do you actually get? This is the key question. Apparently, in some cases at least, what you actually get is the knowledge that you, and you alone, 'own' a digital artefact that can be freely viewed, retained, redistributed, and potentially even resold (via subsequently-minted NFTs) by unlimited numbers of other people. This whole thing is madness. I predict copyright carnage. I think what you really get when you strip away all the bs is the knowledge that an entry exists in a distributed leger confirming that at some point you gave someone some amount of digital currency in exchange for an idea of 'ownership' that exists exclusively in your own mind. It kind of reminds me of www.moonestates.com/
|
|
Lee Ellis Art
Artist
New Member
Posts โข 299
Likes โข 174
Member is Online
July 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Lee Ellis Art on Mar 9, 2021 11:13:07 GMT 1, What do you actually get? This is the key question. Apparently, in some cases at least, what you actually get is the knowledge that you, and you alone, 'own' a digital artefact that can be freely viewed, retained, redistributed, and potentially even resold (via subsequently-minted NFTs) by unlimited numbers of other people. This whole thing is madness. I predict copyright carnage. I think what you really get when you strip away all the bs is the knowledge that an entry exists in a distributed leger confirming that at some point you gave someone some amount of digital currency in exchange for an idea of 'ownership' that exists exclusively in your own mind. It kind of reminds me of www.moonestates.com/ It's a mad concept. The moon estates example is pretty accurate. Some artists do however, send you physical pieces (although this isn't as common as you'd hope). It depends on the artist and if they're a) any good b) legit and are making a career as an artist c) have created a physical item. As mentioned before, there is a lot of awful work on there.
What do you actually get? This is the key question. Apparently, in some cases at least, what you actually get is the knowledge that you, and you alone, 'own' a digital artefact that can be freely viewed, retained, redistributed, and potentially even resold (via subsequently-minted NFTs) by unlimited numbers of other people. This whole thing is madness. I predict copyright carnage. I think what you really get when you strip away all the bs is the knowledge that an entry exists in a distributed leger confirming that at some point you gave someone some amount of digital currency in exchange for an idea of 'ownership' that exists exclusively in your own mind. It kind of reminds me of www.moonestates.com/It's a mad concept. The moon estates example is pretty accurate. Some artists do however, send you physical pieces (although this isn't as common as you'd hope). It depends on the artist and if they're a) any good b) legit and are making a career as an artist c) have created a physical item. As mentioned before, there is a lot of awful work on there.
|
|
rockbeer
New Member
Posts โข 364
Likes โข 445
May 2006
|
NFT Vs Real art, by rockbeer on Mar 9, 2021 11:23:43 GMT 1, This is the key question. Apparently, in some cases at least, what you actually get is the knowledge that you, and you alone, 'own' a digital artefact that can be freely viewed, retained, redistributed, and potentially even resold (via subsequently-minted NFTs) by unlimited numbers of other people. This whole thing is madness. I predict copyright carnage. I think what you really get when you strip away all the bs is the knowledge that an entry exists in a distributed leger confirming that at some point you gave someone some amount of digital currency in exchange for an idea of 'ownership' that exists exclusively in your own mind. It kind of reminds me of www.moonestates.com/It's a mad concept. The moon estates example is pretty accurate. Some artists do however, send you physical pieces (although this isn't as common as you'd hope). It depends on the artist and if they're a) any good b) legit and are making a career as an artist c) have created a physical item. As mentioned before, there is a lot of awful work on there. Indeed - and this is an interesting and important distinction.
I tend to agree. I think there's huge mileage and value in using blockchain tech as a proof of ownership of an actual physical item. A digital, unforgeable COA, if you will.
As for exclusively digital work, well I do get that there is a problem with trying to assign ownership to items of which unlimited identical copies can be freely produced. I think blockchain could be the answer. I can't help thinking that selling 'ownership' of tweets and football touchdowns undermines the credibility of the proposition and makes the whole thing look like a money-grab.
This is the key question. Apparently, in some cases at least, what you actually get is the knowledge that you, and you alone, 'own' a digital artefact that can be freely viewed, retained, redistributed, and potentially even resold (via subsequently-minted NFTs) by unlimited numbers of other people. This whole thing is madness. I predict copyright carnage. I think what you really get when you strip away all the bs is the knowledge that an entry exists in a distributed leger confirming that at some point you gave someone some amount of digital currency in exchange for an idea of 'ownership' that exists exclusively in your own mind. It kind of reminds me of www.moonestates.com/It's a mad concept. The moon estates example is pretty accurate. Some artists do however, send you physical pieces (although this isn't as common as you'd hope). It depends on the artist and if they're a) any good b) legit and are making a career as an artist c) have created a physical item. As mentioned before, there is a lot of awful work on there. Indeed - and this is an interesting and important distinction. I tend to agree. I think there's huge mileage and value in using blockchain tech as a proof of ownership of an actual physical item. A digital, unforgeable COA, if you will. As for exclusively digital work, well I do get that there is a problem with trying to assign ownership to items of which unlimited identical copies can be freely produced. I think blockchain could be the answer. I can't help thinking that selling 'ownership' of tweets and football touchdowns undermines the credibility of the proposition and makes the whole thing look like a money-grab.
|
|
Rubberneck
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,050
Likes โข 1,433
October 2018
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Rubberneck on Mar 9, 2021 11:37:02 GMT 1, Art is art .. its your fault if you don't understand the medium
Art is art .. its your fault if you don't understand the medium
|
|
|
Lee Ellis Art
Artist
New Member
Posts โข 299
Likes โข 174
Member is Online
July 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Lee Ellis Art on Mar 9, 2021 12:11:23 GMT 1, It's a mad concept. The moon estates example is pretty accurate. Some artists do however, send you physical pieces (although this isn't as common as you'd hope). It depends on the artist and if they're a) any good b) legit and are making a career as an artist c) have created a physical item. As mentioned before, there is a lot of awful work on there. Indeed - and this is an interesting and important distinction. I tend to agree. I think there's huge mileage and value in using blockchain tech as a proof of ownership of an actual physical item. A digital, unforgeable COA, if you will. As for exclusively digital work, well I do get that there is a problem with trying to assign ownership to items of which unlimited identical copies can be freely produced. I think blockchain could be the answer. I can't help thinking that selling 'ownership' of tweets and football touchdowns undermines the credibility of the proposition and makes the whole thing look like a money-grab. I agree it has great potential and the items such as tweets and footage could be its downfall if it continues.
It's a mad concept. The moon estates example is pretty accurate. Some artists do however, send you physical pieces (although this isn't as common as you'd hope). It depends on the artist and if they're a) any good b) legit and are making a career as an artist c) have created a physical item. As mentioned before, there is a lot of awful work on there. Indeed - and this is an interesting and important distinction. I tend to agree. I think there's huge mileage and value in using blockchain tech as a proof of ownership of an actual physical item. A digital, unforgeable COA, if you will. As for exclusively digital work, well I do get that there is a problem with trying to assign ownership to items of which unlimited identical copies can be freely produced. I think blockchain could be the answer. I can't help thinking that selling 'ownership' of tweets and football touchdowns undermines the credibility of the proposition and makes the whole thing look like a money-grab. I agree it has great potential and the items such as tweets and footage could be its downfall if it continues.
|
|
Lee Ellis Art
Artist
New Member
Posts โข 299
Likes โข 174
Member is Online
July 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Lee Ellis Art on Mar 9, 2021 12:13:23 GMT 1, Art is art .. its your fault if you don't understand the medium Also agree with this. Artists have always used different mediums. It does stray into dadaism. Especially when asking the age old question... what is art? Is a tweet art or is it something else altogether. I think this is a really interesting debate.
Art is art .. its your fault if you don't understand the medium Also agree with this. Artists have always used different mediums. It does stray into dadaism. Especially when asking the age old question... what is art? Is a tweet art or is it something else altogether. I think this is a really interesting debate.
|
|
dirtypete
New Member
Posts โข 182
Likes โข 258
September 2006
|
NFT Vs Real art, by dirtypete on Mar 9, 2021 12:22:32 GMT 1, Art is art .. its your fault if you don't understand the medium
Well said. Iโve started drawing art with invisible inks recently, which Iโm planning to sell soon in this new medium. Only an idiot canโt see the value in my invisible art.
While I agree NFTs provide a great opportunity for COA, Iโd personally want a physical copy to enjoy on the wall. I have no problem with digital assets (especially music) Iโm just happy to sit this one out. To those who manage to make mad gainz I salute you.
Art is art .. its your fault if you don't understand the medium Well said. Iโve started drawing art with invisible inks recently, which Iโm planning to sell soon in this new medium. Only an idiot canโt see the value in my invisible art. While I agree NFTs provide a great opportunity for COA, Iโd personally want a physical copy to enjoy on the wall. I have no problem with digital assets (especially music) Iโm just happy to sit this one out. To those who manage to make mad gainz I salute you.
|
|
rockbeer
New Member
Posts โข 364
Likes โข 445
May 2006
|
NFT Vs Real art, by rockbeer on Mar 9, 2021 13:58:21 GMT 1, Art is art .. its your fault if you don't understand the medium Also agree with this. Artists have always used different mediums. It does stray into dadaism. Especially when asking the age old question... what is art? Is a tweet art or is it something else altogether. I think this is a really interesting debate. What is art is certainly an interesting question, though in this case perhaps not as interesting as that of who gets to decide.
The dadaist comparison is interesting and I can see certain parallels, although (and I may well be wrong about this, and I happily defer to anyone whose art history knowledge is greater than mine, i.e. just about everyone) my understanding is that the dadaists were primarily concerned with politics and creativity, whereas the key motivation underlying the NFT movement, if it can be called that, appears to be greed.
Art is art .. its your fault if you don't understand the medium Also agree with this. Artists have always used different mediums. It does stray into dadaism. Especially when asking the age old question... what is art? Is a tweet art or is it something else altogether. I think this is a really interesting debate. What is art is certainly an interesting question, though in this case perhaps not as interesting as that of who gets to decide.
The dadaist comparison is interesting and I can see certain parallels, although (and I may well be wrong about this, and I happily defer to anyone whose art history knowledge is greater than mine, i.e. just about everyone) my understanding is that the dadaists were primarily concerned with politics and creativity, whereas the key motivation underlying the NFT movement, if it can be called that, appears to be greed.
|
|
Lee Ellis Art
Artist
New Member
Posts โข 299
Likes โข 174
Member is Online
July 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by Lee Ellis Art on Mar 9, 2021 14:34:01 GMT 1, Also agree with this. Artists have always used different mediums. It does stray into dadaism. Especially when asking the age old question... what is art? Is a tweet art or is it something else altogether. I think this is a really interesting debate. What is art is certainly an interesting question, though in this case perhaps not as interesting as that of who gets to decide.
The dadaist comparison is interesting and I can see certain parallels, although (and I may well be wrong about this, and I happily defer to anyone whose art history knowledge is greater than mine, i.e. just about everyone) my understanding is that the dadaists were primarily concerned with politics and creativity, whereas the key motivation underlying the NFT movement, if it can be called that, appears to be greed.
You are absolutely right! The NFT movement does seem to be greed driven. I've been following various crypto artists on twitter and it is a lot of dick swinging - who makes what and how much something sold for. That said, it's not every artist, the better ones seem to be about creating art and the money earned is a pleasant by-product.
Also agree with this. Artists have always used different mediums. It does stray into dadaism. Especially when asking the age old question... what is art? Is a tweet art or is it something else altogether. I think this is a really interesting debate. What is art is certainly an interesting question, though in this case perhaps not as interesting as that of who gets to decide.
The dadaist comparison is interesting and I can see certain parallels, although (and I may well be wrong about this, and I happily defer to anyone whose art history knowledge is greater than mine, i.e. just about everyone) my understanding is that the dadaists were primarily concerned with politics and creativity, whereas the key motivation underlying the NFT movement, if it can be called that, appears to be greed.
You are absolutely right! The NFT movement does seem to be greed driven. I've been following various crypto artists on twitter and it is a lot of dick swinging - who makes what and how much something sold for. That said, it's not every artist, the better ones seem to be about creating art and the money earned is a pleasant by-product.
|
|
kuni
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,153
Likes โข 1,818
February 2018
|
NFT Vs Real art, by kuni on Mar 9, 2021 18:54:03 GMT 1, What is art is certainly an interesting question, though in this case perhaps not as interesting as that of who gets to decide.
The dadaist comparison is interesting and I can see certain parallels, although (and I may well be wrong about this, and I happily defer to anyone whose art history knowledge is greater than mine, i.e. just about everyone) my understanding is that the dadaists were primarily concerned with politics and creativity, whereas the key motivation underlying the NFT movement, if it can be called that, appears to be greed.
You are absolutely right! The NFT movement does seem to be greed driven. I've been following various crypto artists on twitter and it is a lot of dick swinging - who makes what and how much something sold for. That said, it's not every artist, the better ones seem to be about creating art and the money earned is a pleasant by-product. No doubt about it. I was listening to Steve Aoki on clubhouse leading up to his drop on niftygateway and the only thing the room was missing was a cash register sound effect. They were doing the math in real time on how much money was being made. It was gross and a big turnoff.
That said I grabbed an NFT from Jon Burgerman which is awesome, so you take the good with the bad.
What is art is certainly an interesting question, though in this case perhaps not as interesting as that of who gets to decide.
The dadaist comparison is interesting and I can see certain parallels, although (and I may well be wrong about this, and I happily defer to anyone whose art history knowledge is greater than mine, i.e. just about everyone) my understanding is that the dadaists were primarily concerned with politics and creativity, whereas the key motivation underlying the NFT movement, if it can be called that, appears to be greed.
You are absolutely right! The NFT movement does seem to be greed driven. I've been following various crypto artists on twitter and it is a lot of dick swinging - who makes what and how much something sold for. That said, it's not every artist, the better ones seem to be about creating art and the money earned is a pleasant by-product. No doubt about it. I was listening to Steve Aoki on clubhouse leading up to his drop on niftygateway and the only thing the room was missing was a cash register sound effect. They were doing the math in real time on how much money was being made. It was gross and a big turnoff. That said I grabbed an NFT from Jon Burgerman which is awesome, so you take the good with the bad.
|
|
jimmyjam
New Member
Posts โข 578
Likes โข 546
October 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by jimmyjam on Mar 9, 2021 20:11:26 GMT 1, None of this is a new medium. If anything you are getting small files rather than tiffs or any large files to really do anything with. Technically there is nothing new with the medium. NFT is new but not the medium, thus pure greed driven right now and people laundering crypto to cash.
None of this is a new medium. If anything you are getting small files rather than tiffs or any large files to really do anything with. Technically there is nothing new with the medium. NFT is new but not the medium, thus pure greed driven right now and people laundering crypto to cash.
|
|
kashi
New Member
Posts โข 41
Likes โข 51
November 2019
|
NFT Vs Real art, by kashi on Mar 10, 2021 13:21:37 GMT 1, when i say i'm old skool ... i'm old skool
when i say i'm old skool ... i'm old skool
|
|