|
|
AMs work hanging..., by mose on Jul 26, 2008 18:47:47 GMT 1, I think if this had been done by an unknown artist with that price it would be slagged to hell
I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole.
An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'.
I think if this had been done by an unknown artist with that price it would be slagged to hell I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole. An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'. |
|
motor
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,839
๐๐ป 411
December 2006
|
AMs work hanging..., by motor on Jul 26, 2008 19:04:36 GMT 1, I think if this had been done by an unknown artist with that price it would be slagged to hell I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole. An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'.
good post Mose
I think if this had been done by an unknown artist with that price it would be slagged to hell I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole. An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'. good post Mose |
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by Poppy Sunshine on Jul 26, 2008 19:25:23 GMT 1, I absolutely love Micallef.
He is proper talented and will definitely ride the current storms.
My great ambition is to own an original but it's just a shame that I'd need to line the pockets of Laz to do it.
I'd love to get in touch for a commission.
People still slag off Picasso, Bacon and many of those generally recognised as greats etc but it's all down to taste whether you like the images or not.
The talent behind the work just can not be argued with.
I absolutely love Micallef.
He is proper talented and will definitely ride the current storms.
My great ambition is to own an original but it's just a shame that I'd need to line the pockets of Laz to do it.
I'd love to get in touch for a commission.
People still slag off Picasso, Bacon and many of those generally recognised as greats etc but it's all down to taste whether you like the images or not.
The talent behind the work just can not be argued with.
|
|
ruat caelum
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 110
๐๐ป 0
June 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by ruat caelum on Jul 26, 2008 20:19:19 GMT 1, I think if this had been done by an unknown artist with that price it would be slagged to hell I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole.An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'.
This is a good, clear response to a comment and position which really had not been thought through.
I think if this had been done by an unknown artist with that price it would be slagged to hell I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole.An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'. This is a good, clear response to a comment and position which really had not been thought through. |
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by bobbymeachamjr on Jul 26, 2008 20:48:10 GMT 1, I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole. An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'. good post Mose
Well due to the "new era" in art collecting, just as an artist can rise to stardom overnight he/she can certainly be knocked down as well. Can't have it both ways. You're referencing "careers" - AM has what a 2-3 year portfolio?
I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole. An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'. good post Mose Well due to the "new era" in art collecting, just as an artist can rise to stardom overnight he/she can certainly be knocked down as well. Can't have it both ways. You're referencing "careers" - AM has what a 2-3 year portfolio? |
|
loucastel
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,551
๐๐ป 53
October 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by loucastel on Jul 26, 2008 21:04:16 GMT 1, I think if this had been done by an unknown artist with that price it would be slagged to hell I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole. An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'.
So what you are saying is that no matter how bad a work has been executed, because it is by a particular artist, and a part of his career etc (albeit a short one so far) it doesnt have to standalone on it's own merits, as a work of art in it's own right, so then it must be worth the price.
Are we to make from your post that whatever Micaleff turns out has got to be good?
I would be interested to know also why you think that a lesser known artist couldnt turn out similar work on a par with "dreamer" after all it doesnt look that technicaly challenging, in fact it looks technically challenged.
I think if this had been done by an unknown artist with that price it would be slagged to hell I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole. An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'. So what you are saying is that no matter how bad a work has been executed, because it is by a particular artist, and a part of his career etc (albeit a short one so far) it doesnt have to standalone on it's own merits, as a work of art in it's own right, so then it must be worth the price. Are we to make from your post that whatever Micaleff turns out has got to be good? I would be interested to know also why you think that a lesser known artist couldnt turn out similar work on a par with "dreamer" after all it doesnt look that technicaly challenging, in fact it looks technically challenged. |
|
|
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by snowflake8888 on Jul 26, 2008 21:12:14 GMT 1, I like the third one (the one with the teddy bear). There's something about it that touches me on another level. However, I am not moved by the first two.
I like the third one (the one with the teddy bear). There's something about it that touches me on another level. However, I am not moved by the first two.
|
|
Simococo
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 3,183
๐๐ป 401
April 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by Simococo on Jul 26, 2008 21:20:44 GMT 1, I'm not really a follower of Micallef's work (I have an embargo on all artists that have not spent time in nick for trespass, vandalism or tax evasion) but when I saw the Dreamer in Laz I had to take my hat clear off my head.
Bloody Hell it has depth . It feels like the lad is popping up from another dimension, I kid you not.
I'm not really a follower of Micallef's work (I have an embargo on all artists that have not spent time in nick for trespass, vandalism or tax evasion) but when I saw the Dreamer in Laz I had to take my hat clear off my head.
Bloody Hell it has depth . It feels like the lad is popping up from another dimension, I kid you not.
|
|
Francis
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,571
๐๐ป 137
September 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by Francis on Jul 26, 2008 22:05:50 GMT 1, Do you fellas reckon Micallef has the potential to be a better artist than Francis Bacon?
Do you fellas reckon Micallef has the potential to be a better artist than Francis Bacon?
|
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by bobbyt23 on Jul 26, 2008 22:07:50 GMT 1, I like them but I have always like Micallef's charcoal work.
I like them but I have always like Micallef's charcoal work.
|
|
Deleted
๐จ๏ธ 0
๐๐ป
January 1970
|
AMs work hanging..., by Deleted on Jul 26, 2008 22:09:32 GMT 1, Do you fellas reckon Micallef has the potential to be a better artist than Francis Bacon?
I never see it as better or worse but just "different", thats just my view right or wrong. I know what you mean though. Bacon for me.... micallef as well though (copout).
Do you fellas reckon Micallef has the potential to be a better artist than Francis Bacon? I never see it as better or worse but just "different", thats just my view right or wrong. I know what you mean though. Bacon for me.... micallef as well though (copout). |
|
ruat caelum
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 110
๐๐ป 0
June 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by ruat caelum on Jul 26, 2008 22:12:33 GMT 1, I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole. An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'.
Are we to make from your post that whatever Micaleff turns out has got to be good?I would be interested to know also why you think that a lesser known artist couldnt turn out similar work on a par with "dreamer" after all it doesnt look that technicaly challenging, in fact it looks technically challenged.
I suspect you are being disingenuous and intentionally missing the point.
However, in case you really did not understand what mose was trying to say, the following example may help to clarify:
A simple five-line pencil drawing by Matisse, taken in isolation and on the merits of that drawing alone, is not worth the thousands it would sell for. It is worth thousands because it is a Matisse.
I've never quite understood this line of thinking, though I have heard similar comments many times. When you are buying an original(or print) from an artist, you are buying part of their entire career and not just that single, individual piece. You can't separate it out. Their name, role, hype, talent, appreciation, etc. are all a part of it and the price tag generally takes in to consideration the whole. An unknown artist could not do Antony Micallef's 'Dreamer'.
Are we to make from your post that whatever Micaleff turns out has got to be good?I would be interested to know also why you think that a lesser known artist couldnt turn out similar work on a par with "dreamer" after all it doesnt look that technicaly challenging, in fact it looks technically challenged. I suspect you are being disingenuous and intentionally missing the point. However, in case you really did not understand what mose was trying to say, the following example may help to clarify: A simple five-line pencil drawing by Matisse, taken in isolation and on the merits of that drawing alone, is not worth the thousands it would sell for. It is worth thousands because it is a Matisse. |
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by bobbymeachamjr on Jul 26, 2008 22:28:50 GMT 1, So what you are saying is that no matter how bad a work has been executed, because it is by a particular artist, and a part of his career etc (albeit a short one so far) it doesnt have to standalone on it's own merits, as a work of art in it's own right, so then it must be worth the price.
Are we to make from your post that whatever Micaleff turns out has got to be good?I would be interested to know also why you think that a lesser known artist couldnt turn out similar work on a par with "dreamer" after all it doesnt look that technicaly challenging, in fact it looks technically challenged. I suspect you are being disingenuous and intentionally missing the point. However, in case you really did not understand what mose was trying to say, the following example may help to clarify: A simple five-line pencil drawing by Matisse, taken in isolation and on the merits of that drawing alone, is not worth the thousands it would sell for. It is worth thousands because it is a Matisse.
One problem w/ the analogy - AM does not have much of a portfolio let alone a lasting impression in art history...
So what you are saying is that no matter how bad a work has been executed, because it is by a particular artist, and a part of his career etc (albeit a short one so far) it doesnt have to standalone on it's own merits, as a work of art in it's own right, so then it must be worth the price.
Are we to make from your post that whatever Micaleff turns out has got to be good?I would be interested to know also why you think that a lesser known artist couldnt turn out similar work on a par with "dreamer" after all it doesnt look that technicaly challenging, in fact it looks technically challenged. I suspect you are being disingenuous and intentionally missing the point. However, in case you really did not understand what mose was trying to say, the following example may help to clarify: A simple five-line pencil drawing by Matisse, taken in isolation and on the merits of that drawing alone, is not worth the thousands it would sell for. It is worth thousands because it is a Matisse. One problem w/ the analogy - AM does not have much of a portfolio let alone a lasting impression in art history... |
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by mydeaddogwontwoof on Jul 26, 2008 22:49:47 GMT 1, I would be interested to know also why you think that a lesser known artist couldnt turn out similar work on a par with "dreamer" after all it doesnt look that technicaly challenging, in fact it looks technically challenged.
I actually think it's a very strong image, the technicality comes in it's ability to draw you in, I have spent a lot of time looking at this picture and I see a million and one things going on in that face, it gets the imagination going and that's what I love about it, I find all Antony's portraits mesmerizing, they are what he does best and I can't think of many lesser known artists with this quality....
I would be interested to know also why you think that a lesser known artist couldnt turn out similar work on a par with "dreamer" after all it doesnt look that technicaly challenging, in fact it looks technically challenged. I actually think it's a very strong image, the technicality comes in it's ability to draw you in, I have spent a lot of time looking at this picture and I see a million and one things going on in that face, it gets the imagination going and that's what I love about it, I find all Antony's portraits mesmerizing, they are what he does best and I can't think of many lesser known artists with this quality.... |
|
|
|
guest2
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,471
๐๐ป 1
December 2006
|
AMs work hanging..., by guest2 on Jul 26, 2008 22:56:39 GMT 1, Just under 60k for Dreamer. Thoughts please.  I really enjoy Micallef's work and think, overall, he is one of the finest artists out there. Not everything hits, and the miss rate has been relatively high(for him) lately. That being said, of the post-LA Micallefs, Dreamer is by far my favorite.
Hey Mose, you clearly like the image and the artist, this is all subjective and can not be argued with. My original post also inc the price, how do you see the price in relationship to the piece?
Just under 60k for Dreamer. Thoughts please. I really enjoy Micallef's work and think, overall, he is one of the finest artists out there. Not everything hits, and the miss rate has been relatively high(for him) lately. That being said, of the post-LA Micallefs, Dreamer is by far my favorite. Hey Mose, you clearly like the image and the artist, this is all subjective and can not be argued with. My original post also inc the price, how do you see the price in relationship to the piece? |
|
loucastel
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,551
๐๐ป 53
October 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by loucastel on Jul 26, 2008 22:58:13 GMT 1, So what you are saying is that no matter how bad a work has been executed, because it is by a particular artist, and a part of his career etc (albeit a short one so far) it doesnt have to standalone on it's own merits, as a work of art in it's own right, so then it must be worth the price.
Are we to make from your post that whatever Micaleff turns out has got to be good?I would be interested to know also why you think that a lesser known artist couldnt turn out similar work on a par with "dreamer" after all it doesnt look that technicaly challenging, in fact it looks technically challenged. I suspect you are being disingenuous and intentionally missing the point. However, in case you really did not understand what mose was trying to say, the following example may help to clarify: A simple five-line pencil drawing by Matisse, taken in isolation and on the merits of that drawing alone, is not worth the thousands it would sell for. It is worth thousands because it is a Matisse.
How you can possibly use Matisse as an annalogy is beyond me, he had a career as an artist for many many years, whos reputation was built up over that time, as I said earlier, Micaleff has been around for ,how long, 3-4 years at most, and you can also buy work by Matisse for very little money compared to the staggering sums demanded for some of Micaleffs work.
In your honest opinion do you truly believe his work is worth what is being asked for it, perhaps in 50 years, if he stands the test of time ,maybe. It is a shame you have only picked out little bits of my post and neglected to answer any of the rest
So what you are saying is that no matter how bad a work has been executed, because it is by a particular artist, and a part of his career etc (albeit a short one so far) it doesnt have to standalone on it's own merits, as a work of art in it's own right, so then it must be worth the price.
Are we to make from your post that whatever Micaleff turns out has got to be good?I would be interested to know also why you think that a lesser known artist couldnt turn out similar work on a par with "dreamer" after all it doesnt look that technicaly challenging, in fact it looks technically challenged. I suspect you are being disingenuous and intentionally missing the point. However, in case you really did not understand what mose was trying to say, the following example may help to clarify: A simple five-line pencil drawing by Matisse, taken in isolation and on the merits of that drawing alone, is not worth the thousands it would sell for. It is worth thousands because it is a Matisse. How you can possibly use Matisse as an annalogy is beyond me, he had a career as an artist for many many years, whos reputation was built up over that time, as I said earlier, Micaleff has been around for ,how long, 3-4 years at most, and you can also buy work by Matisse for very little money compared to the staggering sums demanded for some of Micaleffs work. In your honest opinion do you truly believe his work is worth what is being asked for it, perhaps in 50 years, if he stands the test of time ,maybe. It is a shame you have only picked out little bits of my post and neglected to answer any of the rest |
|
loucastel
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,551
๐๐ป 53
October 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by loucastel on Jul 26, 2008 23:03:24 GMT 1, Now see what you've done Frankie!!! lol
Now see what you've done Frankie!!! lol
|
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by slowmo on Jul 26, 2008 23:08:17 GMT 1, Good points made by all. For me Micallef is special, very special. You can tell his work a mile away and he has only just begun. Its unfortunate that LAZ is in control over him, the prices are pretty much secondary market priced, if these had all been priced at ยฃ20,000 they would have sold, then could easily have been sold onto others for double. LAZ come across to me as people who will be damned to lose a penny, they would lose sleep at night knowing someone made more money out of an original than they could sell it for.
Someone asked earlier if Micallef could be better than Bacon, they're entirely different artists, but they both send across similar messages, I think a micallef portrait would sit comfortably alongside a Bacon, the man is a genius.
Good points made by all. For me Micallef is special, very special. You can tell his work a mile away and he has only just begun. Its unfortunate that LAZ is in control over him, the prices are pretty much secondary market priced, if these had all been priced at ยฃ20,000 they would have sold, then could easily have been sold onto others for double. LAZ come across to me as people who will be damned to lose a penny, they would lose sleep at night knowing someone made more money out of an original than they could sell it for.
Someone asked earlier if Micallef could be better than Bacon, they're entirely different artists, but they both send across similar messages, I think a micallef portrait would sit comfortably alongside a Bacon, the man is a genius.
|
|
loucastel
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,551
๐๐ป 53
October 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by loucastel on Jul 26, 2008 23:30:59 GMT 1, Ouch Slowmo, I agree with a lot you said about Laz etc, but to hang alongside a Bacon, (who is one of my favorite artists, If I have such a thing) and compliment each other, that I dont know, Bacon's work comes from a totally different, dark ,tortured place inside himself I think, brought on, as I'm sure you know, by drink and depression, whereas what the reasoning behind Micaleff's work is half the time I'm not sure. very difficult for me to compare the two as regards reasoning, but for artistic flair, depth of image and understanding of what the artist is trying to get across, for me personaly it has to be Bacon every time, so no, I wouldnt like to see them hung side by side, and for Micaleff to be anywhere near as good will, if ever, be a long time off.
Art and peoples different opinions is a fantastic thing, often wondered what makes us like different things!!!
Ouch Slowmo, I agree with a lot you said about Laz etc, but to hang alongside a Bacon, (who is one of my favorite artists, If I have such a thing) and compliment each other, that I dont know, Bacon's work comes from a totally different, dark ,tortured place inside himself I think, brought on, as I'm sure you know, by drink and depression, whereas what the reasoning behind Micaleff's work is half the time I'm not sure. very difficult for me to compare the two as regards reasoning, but for artistic flair, depth of image and understanding of what the artist is trying to get across, for me personaly it has to be Bacon every time, so no, I wouldnt like to see them hung side by side, and for Micaleff to be anywhere near as good will, if ever, be a long time off.
Art and peoples different opinions is a fantastic thing, often wondered what makes us like different things!!!
|
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by slowmo on Jul 26, 2008 23:38:27 GMT 1, I think Bacons strength lied in minimal use of brushstroke to allow the emotion to dominate, I think the same of Micallef. They sit very closely to me in terms of trying to put emotion down on their work, normally from a hopeless or at least broken situation.
I think Bacons strength lied in minimal use of brushstroke to allow the emotion to dominate, I think the same of Micallef. They sit very closely to me in terms of trying to put emotion down on their work, normally from a hopeless or at least broken situation.
|
|
brun
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 879
๐๐ป 0
December 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by brun on Jul 27, 2008 0:16:55 GMT 1, 40K wha the fu........
40K wha the fu........
|
|
ruat caelum
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 110
๐๐ป 0
June 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by ruat caelum on Jul 27, 2008 0:17:45 GMT 1, I suspect you are being disingenuous and intentionally missing the point. However, in case you really did not understand what mose was trying to say, the following example may help to clarify: A simple five-line pencil drawing by Matisse, taken in isolation and on the merits of that drawing alone, is not worth the thousands it would sell for. It is worth thousands because it is a Matisse. How you can possibly use Matisse as an annalogy is beyond me, he had a career as an artist for many many years, whos reputation was built up over that time, as I said earlier, Micaleff has been around for ,how long, 3-4 years at most, and you can also buy work by Matisse for very little money compared to the staggering sums demanded for some of Micaleffs work. In your honest opinion do you truly believe his work is worth what is being asked for it, perhaps in 50 years, if he stands the test of time ,maybe. It is a shame you have only picked out little bits of my post and neglected to answer any of the rest
The circumstances between Matisse and Micallef may be very different, but the principle is exactly the same: When you purchase work by an artist, the price reflects different things, many of which are not directly related to that specific piece.
[As an aside, Micallef won second prize in the BP Portrait Awards in 2000, so he has been around for a bit longer than 3 or 4 years. It may be that people only discovered Micallef after he signed up with Lazinc, or after he produced prints with Eyestorm, but you could certainly buy his work years before then.]
Regarding my own view on the paintings currently hanging at Lazinc, I consider these to be weak by Micallef standards. It is Micallef's black and white heads which were always the pieces that stood out for me, but then I'm a fan of Bacon and Auerbach.
I suspect you are being disingenuous and intentionally missing the point. However, in case you really did not understand what mose was trying to say, the following example may help to clarify: A simple five-line pencil drawing by Matisse, taken in isolation and on the merits of that drawing alone, is not worth the thousands it would sell for. It is worth thousands because it is a Matisse. How you can possibly use Matisse as an annalogy is beyond me, he had a career as an artist for many many years, whos reputation was built up over that time, as I said earlier, Micaleff has been around for ,how long, 3-4 years at most, and you can also buy work by Matisse for very little money compared to the staggering sums demanded for some of Micaleffs work. In your honest opinion do you truly believe his work is worth what is being asked for it, perhaps in 50 years, if he stands the test of time ,maybe. It is a shame you have only picked out little bits of my post and neglected to answer any of the rest The circumstances between Matisse and Micallef may be very different, but the principle is exactly the same: When you purchase work by an artist, the price reflects different things, many of which are not directly related to that specific piece. [As an aside, Micallef won second prize in the BP Portrait Awards in 2000, so he has been around for a bit longer than 3 or 4 years. It may be that people only discovered Micallef after he signed up with Lazinc, or after he produced prints with Eyestorm, but you could certainly buy his work years before then.] Regarding my own view on the paintings currently hanging at Lazinc, I consider these to be weak by Micallef standards. It is Micallef's black and white heads which were always the pieces that stood out for me, but then I'm a fan of Bacon and Auerbach. |
|
|
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by Gentle Mental on Jul 27, 2008 3:22:51 GMT 1, Question is - was bacon this good 3 years into his career?
Question is - was bacon this good 3 years into his career?
|
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by Gentle Mental on Jul 27, 2008 3:54:05 GMT 1, i think Bacon was a tad better - but still....
by this trajectory - micallef would get his Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion in 10 years - if LAZ don't meddle things up too much and turn him into a pop star.
Back off greedy LAZ! You're killing your golden egg laying goose, dumbass!
i think Bacon was a tad better - but still....
by this trajectory - micallef would get his Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion in 10 years - if LAZ don't meddle things up too much and turn him into a pop star.
Back off greedy LAZ! You're killing your golden egg laying goose, dumbass!
|
|
Heavyconsumer
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 4,974
๐๐ป 5
February 2008
|
AMs work hanging..., by Heavyconsumer on Jul 27, 2008 6:05:35 GMT 1, I'm a fan of micallef, but i'm thinking to myself if these were by anyone else i really wouldn't look twice at them. Definitely think it's not his best work, and would agree with Richard above... i'd rather have the Ian Francis original at the graffle than any of these!
Ditto on all counts really. Of the 3 images posted by ALB I quite like the last one, but the other 2 leave me totally cold. I'm fairly confident there will be some of his new work that impresses me more though.
I'm a fan of micallef, but i'm thinking to myself if these were by anyone else i really wouldn't look twice at them. Definitely think it's not his best work, and would agree with Richard above... i'd rather have the Ian Francis original at the graffle than any of these! Ditto on all counts really. Of the 3 images posted by ALB I quite like the last one, but the other 2 leave me totally cold. I'm fairly confident there will be some of his new work that impresses me more though. |
|
|
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by mose on Jul 27, 2008 19:03:51 GMT 1, Hey Mose, you clearly like the image and the artist, this is all subjective and can not be argued with. My original post also inc the price, how do you see the price in relationship to the piece?
Well, I think what has to be discussed along with the price is the question, "What league are we playing in with Micallef?"
If you think that Micallef looks like he is in-line for promotion to the Premiere League, then the price is not so bad at all. I mean, $100k for a very good(IMO), large canvas from a rising contemporary artist with a good collector base is downright cheap these days. Perhaps still a bit aggressive, but opportunities to buy greatness young are generally rare if you don't spend your days doing the research. Still though, I'd rather see that $100k achieved at auction as opposed to priced at primary.
If you think that Micallef plays only in the current 'urban' genre(or whatever you want to call it), to the collector-base that frequents these forums, all of which is basically a local, afterwork club league, then the price is stunningly ridiculous.
The vast, vast majority of us here play small-time, club-league level. There are relatively few true, 'real' art collectors on these boards of ours. There are even fewer true, 'real', established top artists discussed here. At the end of the days, most of us are niche players collecting niche artists for small money. To us, this piece would seem very much overpriced.
Hey Mose, you clearly like the image and the artist, this is all subjective and can not be argued with. My original post also inc the price, how do you see the price in relationship to the piece? Well, I think what has to be discussed along with the price is the question, "What league are we playing in with Micallef?" If you think that Micallef looks like he is in-line for promotion to the Premiere League, then the price is not so bad at all. I mean, $100k for a very good(IMO), large canvas from a rising contemporary artist with a good collector base is downright cheap these days. Perhaps still a bit aggressive, but opportunities to buy greatness young are generally rare if you don't spend your days doing the research. Still though, I'd rather see that $100k achieved at auction as opposed to priced at primary. If you think that Micallef plays only in the current 'urban' genre(or whatever you want to call it), to the collector-base that frequents these forums, all of which is basically a local, afterwork club league, then the price is stunningly ridiculous. The vast, vast majority of us here play small-time, club-league level. There are relatively few true, 'real' art collectors on these boards of ours. There are even fewer true, 'real', established top artists discussed here. At the end of the days, most of us are niche players collecting niche artists for small money. To us, this piece would seem very much overpriced. |
|
Heavyconsumer
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 4,974
๐๐ป 5
February 2008
|
AMs work hanging..., by Heavyconsumer on Jul 27, 2008 19:11:33 GMT 1, Nice post Mose. How can we compare an academy graduate to Maradonna or Pele? There are too many variables imo to draw a direct comparison between Mic and someone like Bacon. The only opinions I would be interested in hearing on making such a comparison, are those of experienced pros working in the world of fine art (I for one am not, in case anyone here is a complete numpty and didn't already realise that!). Otherwise it seems like pure conjecture.
Nice post Mose. How can we compare an academy graduate to Maradonna or Pele? There are too many variables imo to draw a direct comparison between Mic and someone like Bacon. The only opinions I would be interested in hearing on making such a comparison, are those of experienced pros working in the world of fine art (I for one am not, in case anyone here is a complete numpty and didn't already realise that!). Otherwise it seems like pure conjecture.
|
|
loucastel
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,551
๐๐ป 53
October 2007
|
AMs work hanging..., by loucastel on Jul 27, 2008 19:35:52 GMT 1, Nice post Mose. How can we compare an academy graduate to Maradonna or Pele? There are too many variables imo to draw a direct comparison between Mic and someone like Bacon. The only opinions I would be interested in hearing on making such a comparison, are those of experienced pros working in the world of fine art (I for one am not, in case anyone here is a complete numpty and didn't already realise that!). Otherwise it seems like pure conjecture.
What an absolutely crass thing to say, every single person has a right to voice an opinion, from the lowlyest on here to the top collectors, and what makes you think that the pros working in the field of fine art have better taste, or actually know more, the only difference is they get paid for it, after all it is just a job,done by people who can dress it up in fancy words ,which I doubt many would understand, including me.
And yes it is conjecture, but I thought thats what this forum is all about, to discuss things!!
Nice post Mose. How can we compare an academy graduate to Maradonna or Pele? There are too many variables imo to draw a direct comparison between Mic and someone like Bacon. The only opinions I would be interested in hearing on making such a comparison, are those of experienced pros working in the world of fine art (I for one am not, in case anyone here is a complete numpty and didn't already realise that!). Otherwise it seems like pure conjecture. What an absolutely crass thing to say, every single person has a right to voice an opinion, from the lowlyest on here to the top collectors, and what makes you think that the pros working in the field of fine art have better taste, or actually know more, the only difference is they get paid for it, after all it is just a job,done by people who can dress it up in fancy words ,which I doubt many would understand, including me. And yes it is conjecture, but I thought thats what this forum is all about, to discuss things!! |
|
|
|
AMs work hanging..., by bobbymeachamjr on Jul 27, 2008 19:51:21 GMT 1, Enough with the "micallef is super talented, yes 100K usd is perfectly priced". Well, theres a plethora of super talented artists here in nyc who command 10K and under for large canvases. Give me some names of other 100K at source artists and their CV. I would bet that its considerably more impressive than Micallefs...
oh and b4 you do, no Banksy please...
Enough with the "micallef is super talented, yes 100K usd is perfectly priced". Well, theres a plethora of super talented artists here in nyc who command 10K and under for large canvases. Give me some names of other 100K at source artists and their CV. I would bet that its considerably more impressive than Micallefs...
oh and b4 you do, no Banksy please...
|
|
