|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Everyone Owes on Dec 21, 2017 20:00:57 GMT 1, If you read the post, all the details are there. It is perfectly transparent. Furthermore, everyone is welcome to message me privately with questions and do their own research before purchasing. Best, Oli
Welcome to the forum - your post is misleading and designed to mislead. I imagine we won't see much more of you unless you're selling.
If you read the post, all the details are there. It is perfectly transparent. Furthermore, everyone is welcome to message me privately with questions and do their own research before purchasing. Best, Oli Welcome to the forum - your post is misleading and designed to mislead. I imagine we won't see much more of you unless you're selling. |
|
.dappy
Full Member
🗨️ 9,841
👍🏻 9,462
December 2010
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by .dappy on Dec 22, 2017 0:17:58 GMT 1, ... your original post is absolutely factual ...
... however equating them to 'and purchasing a similar spin painting on paper from Hirst's studio directly costs £21,600.' is again factual, but stretches the association to those that may not be so well read up on the subject of Damien Hirst's works ...
... your original post is absolutely factual ...
... however equating them to 'and purchasing a similar spin painting on paper from Hirst's studio directly costs £21,600.' is again factual, but stretches the association to those that may not be so well read up on the subject of Damien Hirst's works ...
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Express Post on Dec 22, 2017 0:22:43 GMT 1, Hi there, The original post clearly states that these are Damien Hirst workshop paintings from 2009. If you need me to screenshot and send you the original post (rather than simply editing the original post in a poor attempt to make a point as you did) in order to satisfy you of this, please let me know. How this is misleading is beyond me. What Damien chooses to authorise and authenticate is none of your concern. If you’re not interested please don’t waste my time or that of other UAA members attempting to undermine artwork. Best, Oli
There's that UAA tax I was talking about
Hi there, The original post clearly states that these are Damien Hirst workshop paintings from 2009. If you need me to screenshot and send you the original post (rather than simply editing the original post in a poor attempt to make a point as you did) in order to satisfy you of this, please let me know. How this is misleading is beyond me. What Damien chooses to authorise and authenticate is none of your concern. If you’re not interested please don’t waste my time or that of other UAA members attempting to undermine artwork. Best, Oli There's that UAA tax I was talking about |
|
.dappy
Full Member
🗨️ 9,841
👍🏻 9,462
December 2010
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by .dappy on Dec 22, 2017 1:33:04 GMT 1, 'what Damien chooses to authorise and authenticate is none of your concern'
... in fact it is to the many collectors and newbies on the forum ...
... hirst is well known as being used as a source of fakes for his spot paintings and only last year there was an article about fake spin paintings ...
www.antiquestradegazette.com/news/2016/damien-hirst-fakes-flood-the-market/
... now ... you did not mention in your original sales pitch that these spin paintings may well have been carried out by members of the public at his 'show' as well as by his assistants ... I am also aware that DH was there for a time himself ...
... if you have full provenance which may well include photos of them being made, then you should have no problem selling them ...
... also if you do not like to be questioned, then take them to ebay ...
'what Damien chooses to authorise and authenticate is none of your concern' ... in fact it is to the many collectors and newbies on the forum ... ... hirst is well known as being used as a source of fakes for his spot paintings and only last year there was an article about fake spin paintings ... www.antiquestradegazette.com/news/2016/damien-hirst-fakes-flood-the-market/... now ... you did not mention in your original sales pitch that these spin paintings may well have been carried out by members of the public at his 'show' as well as by his assistants ... I am also aware that DH was there for a time himself ... ... if you have full provenance which may well include photos of them being made, then you should have no problem selling them ... ... also if you do not like to be questioned, then take them to ebay ... |
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Rouen Cathedral on Dec 22, 2017 1:51:05 GMT 1, 'what Damien chooses to authorise and authenticate is none of your concern' ... in fact it is to the many collectors and newbies on the forum ... ... hirst is well known as being used as a source of fakes for his spot paintings and only last year there was an article about fake spin paintings ... www.antiquestradegazette.com/news/2016/damien-hirst-fakes-flood-the-market/... now ... you did not mention in your original sales pitch that these spin paintings may well have been carried out by members of the public at his 'show' as well as by his assistants ... I am also aware that DH was there for a time himself ... ... if you have full provenance which may well include photos of them being made, then you should have no problem selling them ... ... also if you do not like to be questioned, then take them to ebay ...
So for the record is it okay to question shady seller practices?
Or only if it’s not me! Haha.
'what Damien chooses to authorise and authenticate is none of your concern' ... in fact it is to the many collectors and newbies on the forum ... ... hirst is well known as being used as a source of fakes for his spot paintings and only last year there was an article about fake spin paintings ... www.antiquestradegazette.com/news/2016/damien-hirst-fakes-flood-the-market/... now ... you did not mention in your original sales pitch that these spin paintings may well have been carried out by members of the public at his 'show' as well as by his assistants ... I am also aware that DH was there for a time himself ... ... if you have full provenance which may well include photos of them being made, then you should have no problem selling them ... ... also if you do not like to be questioned, then take them to ebay ... So for the record is it okay to question shady seller practices? Or only if it’s not me! Haha. |
|
.dappy
Full Member
🗨️ 9,841
👍🏻 9,462
December 2010
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by .dappy on Dec 22, 2017 2:27:31 GMT 1, So for the record is it okay to question shady seller practices? Or only if it’s not me! Haha.
... for the record, as you say ... you do not add anything to any Thread or conversation ... and people do not forget about your defense of frisky ...
... I will not be continuing this conversation with you ...
So for the record is it okay to question shady seller practices? Or only if it’s not me! Haha. ... for the record, as you say ... you do not add anything to any Thread or conversation ... and people do not forget about your defense of frisky ... ... I will not be continuing this conversation with you ... |
|
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Rouen Cathedral on Dec 22, 2017 3:00:43 GMT 1, So for the record is it okay to question shady seller practices? Or only if it’s not me! Haha. ... for the record, as you say ... you do not add anything to any Thread or conversation ... and people do not forget about your defense of frisky ... ... I will not be continuing this conversation with you ...
My defense of frisky?
Lol good one.
And for the record I’ve had plenty of good conversations and private messages with people.
For some reason I seem to have hurt your feelings once and you are holding a grudge. For that I apologize.
So for the record is it okay to question shady seller practices? Or only if it’s not me! Haha. ... for the record, as you say ... you do not add anything to any Thread or conversation ... and people do not forget about your defense of frisky ... ... I will not be continuing this conversation with you ... My defense of frisky? Lol good one. And for the record I’ve had plenty of good conversations and private messages with people. For some reason I seem to have hurt your feelings once and you are holding a grudge. For that I apologize. |
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Gentle Mental on Dec 22, 2017 3:32:38 GMT 1, Stamped signed or hand signed? Any provenance from Hirst himself?
If it isn’t say it isn’t. Just say it. Everything is an authentic artwork. By whom is the key.
How many do you have? Are these gift shop souvenirs or real artwork by Hirst?
Please provide info so all would know. Thanks.
Stamped signed or hand signed? Any provenance from Hirst himself?
If it isn’t say it isn’t. Just say it. Everything is an authentic artwork. By whom is the key.
How many do you have? Are these gift shop souvenirs or real artwork by Hirst?
Please provide info so all would know. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Brushstrokes 75 on Dec 22, 2017 3:37:14 GMT 1, I'm gonna chip in.
Oli your original post is misleading and I am not implying that you did so willingly.
The way you have been presented the works make it sound like those are Damien Hirst pieces similar to the ones released at other criteria (and are as coveted). And you compared the two by praising how a great deal it was.
Afterwards, you did give more details and specified that these were made by the public during the opening of a museum and people got to leave with them. They obviously have been authorized by Damien Hirst himself and they are in some ways were made "after" Damien Hirst because he obviously gave his autorization.
So you are right by saying they are not "fakes" but you are misleading by not mentioning that from the get go from your original post and people are allowed to want to clearly understand what they are in public rather than in Private.
I'm a modern and early contemport print "specialist" (whatever that means) so I thought I would just give my personal opinion on the following maybe it helps clarify a few things.
A lot of artists (Picasso, Miro, Matisse...) made what we call "after" prints.They are different categories in what we call after prints.
The original basic idea was that the artist's master printer would draw a print from an original work from the artist (drawings, gouache, paintings...) by using different techniques (ranging from plate transfer to full recreation). The artist would oversee the whole process and even correct the different states. He would later approve of the final edition by signing it himself. (Picasso or Braque among others have used that a lot).
There used to be a lot of collaborations (even sometimes to the point of synergy) between master printers and artists. To the point, where some artists let some of the master printers to fully create new works in the style of the artist himself (under the supervision and authorization of the artist) . A good example of that was Charles Sorlier with Marc Chagall. After working and trusting him, Chagall would at first allow Sorlier to touch up his prints then later on to full create images in the style of Chagall (Sorlier would also signed the plate with his name).
Picasso and Matisse did similar a thing with Jacques Villon (who was a terrific artist in his own right and Marcel Duchamp older bro). Villon printed and created a few aquatints and etchings for Matisse and Picasso that Villon would sign in the plate and the artists would countersign in pencil.
Those "after" prints are considered equally as part of the artist catalogue and are as valuable as "normal" prints.
If you look at the Sorlier example, Sorlier's prints are some of the most searched and higher priced pieces out of the entire graphic catologue of Chagall. (not saying it is the norm among artists this is a unique exception).
To summarize the way I understood it from what I read :
Pieces were made by the public during an exhibition opening in Ukraine. They are stamp signed so it means that the artist authorized them + the Hirst blindstamp (so the artist consider those as his own output).
Now we don't know how many sheets were out there because I am assuming blank sheets were at the museum with the stamp signature.
Now, I am not gonna comment on the value or anything for sale as this is not my place. People are entitled to buy or sell at whatever price they want.
I'm gonna chip in.
Oli your original post is misleading and I am not implying that you did so willingly.
The way you have been presented the works make it sound like those are Damien Hirst pieces similar to the ones released at other criteria (and are as coveted). And you compared the two by praising how a great deal it was.
Afterwards, you did give more details and specified that these were made by the public during the opening of a museum and people got to leave with them. They obviously have been authorized by Damien Hirst himself and they are in some ways were made "after" Damien Hirst because he obviously gave his autorization.
So you are right by saying they are not "fakes" but you are misleading by not mentioning that from the get go from your original post and people are allowed to want to clearly understand what they are in public rather than in Private.
I'm a modern and early contemport print "specialist" (whatever that means) so I thought I would just give my personal opinion on the following maybe it helps clarify a few things.
A lot of artists (Picasso, Miro, Matisse...) made what we call "after" prints.They are different categories in what we call after prints.
The original basic idea was that the artist's master printer would draw a print from an original work from the artist (drawings, gouache, paintings...) by using different techniques (ranging from plate transfer to full recreation). The artist would oversee the whole process and even correct the different states. He would later approve of the final edition by signing it himself. (Picasso or Braque among others have used that a lot).
There used to be a lot of collaborations (even sometimes to the point of synergy) between master printers and artists. To the point, where some artists let some of the master printers to fully create new works in the style of the artist himself (under the supervision and authorization of the artist) . A good example of that was Charles Sorlier with Marc Chagall. After working and trusting him, Chagall would at first allow Sorlier to touch up his prints then later on to full create images in the style of Chagall (Sorlier would also signed the plate with his name).
Picasso and Matisse did similar a thing with Jacques Villon (who was a terrific artist in his own right and Marcel Duchamp older bro). Villon printed and created a few aquatints and etchings for Matisse and Picasso that Villon would sign in the plate and the artists would countersign in pencil.
Those "after" prints are considered equally as part of the artist catalogue and are as valuable as "normal" prints.
If you look at the Sorlier example, Sorlier's prints are some of the most searched and higher priced pieces out of the entire graphic catologue of Chagall. (not saying it is the norm among artists this is a unique exception).
To summarize the way I understood it from what I read :
Pieces were made by the public during an exhibition opening in Ukraine. They are stamp signed so it means that the artist authorized them + the Hirst blindstamp (so the artist consider those as his own output).
Now we don't know how many sheets were out there because I am assuming blank sheets were at the museum with the stamp signature.
Now, I am not gonna comment on the value or anything for sale as this is not my place. People are entitled to buy or sell at whatever price they want.
|
|
nobokov
Junior Member
🗨️ 4,948
👍🏻 6,901
February 2016
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by nobokov on Dec 22, 2017 5:12:59 GMT 1, I'm gonna chip in. Oli your original post is misleading and I am not implying that you did so willingly. The way you have been presented the works make it sound like those are Damien Hirst pieces similar to the ones released at other criteria (and are as coveted). And you compared the two by praising how a great deal it was. Afterwards, you did give more details and specified that these were made by the public during the opening of a museum and people got to leave with them. They obviously have been authorized by Damien Hirst himself and they are in some ways were made "after" Damien Hirst because he obviously gave his autorization. So you are right by saying they are not "fakes" but you are misleading by not mentioning that from the get go from your original post and people are allowed to want to clearly understand what they are in public rather than in Private. I'm a modern and early contemport print "specialist" (whatever that means) so I thought I would just give my personal opinion on the following maybe it helps clarify a few things. A lot of artists (Picasso, Miro, Matisse...) made what we call "after" prints.They are different categories in what we call after prints. The original basic idea was that the artist's master printer would draw a print from an original work from the artist (drawings, gouache, paintings...) by using different techniques (ranging from plate transfer to full recreation). The artist would oversee the whole process and even correct the different states. He would later approve of the final edition by signing it himself. (Picasso or Braque among others have used that a lot). There used to be a lot of collaborations (even sometimes to the point of synergy) between master printers and artists. To the point, where some artists let some of the master printers to fully create new works in the style of the artist himself (under the supervision and authorization of the artist) . A good example of that was Charles Sorlier with Marc Chagall. After working and trusting him, Chagall would at first allow Sorlier to touch up his prints then later on to full create images in the style of Chagall (Sorlier would also signed the plate with his name). Picasso and Matisse did similar a thing with Jacques Villon (who was a terrific artist in his own right and Marcel Duchamp older bro). Villon printed and created a few aquatints and etchings for Matisse and Picasso that Villon would sign in the plate and the artists would countersign in pencil. Those "after" prints are considered equally as part of the artist catalogue and are as valuable as "normal" prints. If you look at the Sorlier example, Sorlier's prints are some of the most searched and higher priced pieces out of the entire graphic catologue of Chagall. (not saying it is the norm among artists this is a unique exception). To summarize the way I understood it from what I read : Pieces were made by the public during an exhibition opening in Ukraine. They are stamp signed so it means that the artist authorized them + the Hirst blindstamp (so the artist consider those as his own output). Now we don't know how many sheets were out there because I am assuming blank sheets were at the museum with the stamp signature. Now, I am not gonna comment on the value or anything for sale as this is not my place. People are entitled to buy or sell at whatever price they want.
I'm gonna chip in. Oli your original post is misleading and I am not implying that you did so willingly. The way you have been presented the works make it sound like those are Damien Hirst pieces similar to the ones released at other criteria (and are as coveted). And you compared the two by praising how a great deal it was. Afterwards, you did give more details and specified that these were made by the public during the opening of a museum and people got to leave with them. They obviously have been authorized by Damien Hirst himself and they are in some ways were made "after" Damien Hirst because he obviously gave his autorization. So you are right by saying they are not "fakes" but you are misleading by not mentioning that from the get go from your original post and people are allowed to want to clearly understand what they are in public rather than in Private. I'm a modern and early contemport print "specialist" (whatever that means) so I thought I would just give my personal opinion on the following maybe it helps clarify a few things. A lot of artists (Picasso, Miro, Matisse...) made what we call "after" prints.They are different categories in what we call after prints. The original basic idea was that the artist's master printer would draw a print from an original work from the artist (drawings, gouache, paintings...) by using different techniques (ranging from plate transfer to full recreation). The artist would oversee the whole process and even correct the different states. He would later approve of the final edition by signing it himself. (Picasso or Braque among others have used that a lot). There used to be a lot of collaborations (even sometimes to the point of synergy) between master printers and artists. To the point, where some artists let some of the master printers to fully create new works in the style of the artist himself (under the supervision and authorization of the artist) . A good example of that was Charles Sorlier with Marc Chagall. After working and trusting him, Chagall would at first allow Sorlier to touch up his prints then later on to full create images in the style of Chagall (Sorlier would also signed the plate with his name). Picasso and Matisse did similar a thing with Jacques Villon (who was a terrific artist in his own right and Marcel Duchamp older bro). Villon printed and created a few aquatints and etchings for Matisse and Picasso that Villon would sign in the plate and the artists would countersign in pencil. Those "after" prints are considered equally as part of the artist catalogue and are as valuable as "normal" prints. If you look at the Sorlier example, Sorlier's prints are some of the most searched and higher priced pieces out of the entire graphic catologue of Chagall. (not saying it is the norm among artists this is a unique exception). To summarize the way I understood it from what I read : Pieces were made by the public during an exhibition opening in Ukraine. They are stamp signed so it means that the artist authorized them + the Hirst blindstamp (so the artist consider those as his own output). Now we don't know how many sheets were out there because I am assuming blank sheets were at the museum with the stamp signature. Now, I am not gonna comment on the value or anything for sale as this is not my place. People are entitled to buy or sell at whatever price they want. Great information. Posts like yours are precisely why I visit this forum. |
|
mike3489
New Member
🗨️ 89
👍🏻 49
April 2012
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by mike3489 on Dec 22, 2017 6:03:19 GMT 1, I don't get how people can support an artist that kills several animals for his "art". He has paid people to kill several sharks for his shows, along with several other smaller animals. Damien Hirst is a coward of the highest order.
I don't get how people can support an artist that kills several animals for his "art". He has paid people to kill several sharks for his shows, along with several other smaller animals. Damien Hirst is a coward of the highest order.
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Villain Dillon on Dec 22, 2017 6:52:28 GMT 1, I'm gonna chip in. Oli your original post is misleading and I am not implying that you did so willingly. The way you have been presented the works make it sound like those are Damien Hirst pieces similar to the ones released at other criteria (and are as coveted). And you compared the two by praising how a great deal it was. Afterwards, you did give more details and specified that these were made by the public during the opening of a museum and people got to leave with them. They obviously have been authorized by Damien Hirst himself and they are in some ways were made "after" Damien Hirst because he obviously gave his autorization. So you are right by saying they are not "fakes" but you are misleading by not mentioning that from the get go from your original post and people are allowed to want to clearly understand what they are in public rather than in Private. I'm a modern and early contemport print "specialist" (whatever that means) so I thought I would just give my personal opinion on the following maybe it helps clarify a few things. A lot of artists (Picasso, Miro, Matisse...) made what we call "after" prints.They are different categories in what we call after prints. The original basic idea was that the artist's master printer would draw a print from an original work from the artist (drawings, gouache, paintings...) by using different techniques (ranging from plate transfer to full recreation). The artist would oversee the whole process and even correct the different states. He would later approve of the final edition by signing it himself. (Picasso or Braque among others have used that a lot). There used to be a lot of collaborations (even sometimes to the point of synergy) between master printers and artists. To the point, where some artists let some of the master printers to fully create new works in the style of the artist himself (under the supervision and authorization of the artist) . A good example of that was Charles Sorlier with Marc Chagall. After working and trusting him, Chagall would at first allow Sorlier to touch up his prints then later on to full create images in the style of Chagall (Sorlier would also signed the plate with his name). Picasso and Matisse did similar a thing with Jacques Villon (who was a terrific artist in his own right and Marcel Duchamp older bro). Villon printed and created a few aquatints and etchings for Matisse and Picasso that Villon would sign in the plate and the artists would countersign in pencil. Those "after" prints are considered equally as part of the artist catalogue and are as valuable as "normal" prints. If you look at the Sorlier example, Sorlier's prints are some of the most searched and higher priced pieces out of the entire graphic catologue of Chagall. (not saying it is the norm among artists this is a unique exception). To summarize the way I understood it from what I read : Pieces were made by the public during an exhibition opening in Ukraine. They are stamp signed so it means that the artist authorized them + the Hirst blindstamp (so the artist consider those as his own output). Now we don't know how many sheets were out there because I am assuming blank sheets were at the museum with the stamp signature. Now, I am not gonna comment on the value or anything for sale as this is not my place. People are entitled to buy or sell at whatever price they want.
I'm gonna chip in. Oli your original post is misleading and I am not implying that you did so willingly. The way you have been presented the works make it sound like those are Damien Hirst pieces similar to the ones released at other criteria (and are as coveted). And you compared the two by praising how a great deal it was. Afterwards, you did give more details and specified that these were made by the public during the opening of a museum and people got to leave with them. They obviously have been authorized by Damien Hirst himself and they are in some ways were made "after" Damien Hirst because he obviously gave his autorization. So you are right by saying they are not "fakes" but you are misleading by not mentioning that from the get go from your original post and people are allowed to want to clearly understand what they are in public rather than in Private. I'm a modern and early contemport print "specialist" (whatever that means) so I thought I would just give my personal opinion on the following maybe it helps clarify a few things. A lot of artists (Picasso, Miro, Matisse...) made what we call "after" prints.They are different categories in what we call after prints. The original basic idea was that the artist's master printer would draw a print from an original work from the artist (drawings, gouache, paintings...) by using different techniques (ranging from plate transfer to full recreation). The artist would oversee the whole process and even correct the different states. He would later approve of the final edition by signing it himself. (Picasso or Braque among others have used that a lot). There used to be a lot of collaborations (even sometimes to the point of synergy) between master printers and artists. To the point, where some artists let some of the master printers to fully create new works in the style of the artist himself (under the supervision and authorization of the artist) . A good example of that was Charles Sorlier with Marc Chagall. After working and trusting him, Chagall would at first allow Sorlier to touch up his prints then later on to full create images in the style of Chagall (Sorlier would also signed the plate with his name). Picasso and Matisse did similar a thing with Jacques Villon (who was a terrific artist in his own right and Marcel Duchamp older bro). Villon printed and created a few aquatints and etchings for Matisse and Picasso that Villon would sign in the plate and the artists would countersign in pencil. Those "after" prints are considered equally as part of the artist catalogue and are as valuable as "normal" prints. If you look at the Sorlier example, Sorlier's prints are some of the most searched and higher priced pieces out of the entire graphic catologue of Chagall. (not saying it is the norm among artists this is a unique exception). To summarize the way I understood it from what I read : Pieces were made by the public during an exhibition opening in Ukraine. They are stamp signed so it means that the artist authorized them + the Hirst blindstamp (so the artist consider those as his own output). Now we don't know how many sheets were out there because I am assuming blank sheets were at the museum with the stamp signature. Now, I am not gonna comment on the value or anything for sale as this is not my place. People are entitled to buy or sell at whatever price they want. This is one of the most informative posts I've read on this forum. Thank you for sharing with us - I genuinely appreciate it! |
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Brushstrokes 75 on Dec 22, 2017 7:26:24 GMT 1, I apologize for the typos and all. It's late and didn't reread.
I will just add that I am in no way connected with oli, I do not own anything by Hirst (and never will).
Thanks for the sweet comments, if anyone wants more detailed info or has more specific questions, I'm happy to answer by PM (don't want to hijack this thread even more)
I apologize for the typos and all. It's late and didn't reread.
I will just add that I am in no way connected with oli, I do not own anything by Hirst (and never will).
Thanks for the sweet comments, if anyone wants more detailed info or has more specific questions, I'm happy to answer by PM (don't want to hijack this thread even more)
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Express Post on Dec 22, 2017 7:33:12 GMT 1, I apologize for the typos and all. It's late and didn't reread. I will just add that I am in no way connected with oli, I do not own anything by Hirst (and never will). Thanks for the sweet comments, if anyone wants more detailed info or has more specific questions, I'm happy to answer by PM (don't want to hijack this thread even more)
I learnt something today. Thanks for your help.
Much appreciated.
I apologize for the typos and all. It's late and didn't reread. I will just add that I am in no way connected with oli, I do not own anything by Hirst (and never will). Thanks for the sweet comments, if anyone wants more detailed info or has more specific questions, I'm happy to answer by PM (don't want to hijack this thread even more) I learnt something today. Thanks for your help. Much appreciated. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Viking Surfer on Dec 28, 2017 8:47:05 GMT 1, This whole thread is an important reminder for collectors to be very careful on here.
This whole thread is an important reminder for collectors to be very careful on here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Daniel Silk on Jun 7, 2022 21:02:06 GMT 1, The Damien Hirst Spin Paintings seem so rare to come up for sale don't you think? I wonder if people just love them so much in their collections, it's one of those pieces that they would never sell.
https://www.instagram.com/p/Ceg1rYCJqHz
The Damien Hirst Spin Paintings seem so rare to come up for sale don't you think? I wonder if people just love them so much in their collections, it's one of those pieces that they would never sell. https://www.instagram.com/p/Ceg1rYCJqHz |
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Daniel Silk on Jun 10, 2022 20:06:30 GMT 1, Great to see people getting these small Damien Hirst Spin Paintings 👏 Wouldn't it be nice if he released a big edition of them? Massively popular I think.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CeomMKHsc8Z
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Daniel Silk on Jun 11, 2022 8:20:01 GMT 1, More really nice Damien Hirst Spin Paintings.
Looks like Hirst really likes wearing rings! Is that 7 or 8 all together?
https://www.instagram.com/p/CepYWBkvK-s
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Daniel Silk on Jun 11, 2022 19:17:17 GMT 1, Lots of very happy people getting these Hirst Spin Paintings 👏 I think it's all very clever marketing by Hirst that will give him a very strong database of regular guaranteed buyers for future releases.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CeVoQOMIi8M
Lots of very happy people getting these Hirst Spin Paintings 👏 I think it's all very clever marketing by Hirst that will give him a very strong database of regular guaranteed buyers for future releases. https://www.instagram.com/p/CeVoQOMIi8M |
|
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Daniel Silk on Jun 18, 2022 18:55:26 GMT 1, Very nice framing example of one of those new Damien Hirst Spin Paintings 👏🏻 Always tricky framing a round piece of Art.
https://www.instagram.com/p/Ce8YXT7s59w
|
|
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Daniel Silk on Jul 7, 2022 5:57:54 GMT 1, More of those mini Damien Hirst Spin Paintings poping up on social media, looks like all the framers are busy.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CfoQncYIwBQ
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Daniel Silk on Jul 11, 2022 0:48:12 GMT 1, What a beautiful Spin Painting 😳 Is something like that produced in the same way, just maybe it's spun faster or the paint mixture is different to make it go like that? What do you think.
https://www.instagram.com/p/Cf2EqBUIZKu
What a beautiful Spin Painting 😳 Is something like that produced in the same way, just maybe it's spun faster or the paint mixture is different to make it go like that? What do you think. https://www.instagram.com/p/Cf2EqBUIZKu |
|
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Daniel Silk on Sept 27, 2022 15:03:59 GMT 1, Super nice Damien Hirst Spin Painting 😳 Love how they have the blues and black matching with the chairs, looks perfect.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CjAfqnZsLcs
|
|
|
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by Daniel Silk on Oct 8, 2022 20:28:37 GMT 1, Signed with a Damien Hirst Courts Gold Credit Card 😳 is that normal for these pieces?
https://www.instagram.com/p/CjdP1Naq8YN
|
|
londonfx
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,163
👍🏻 707
December 2013
|
Damien Hirst Spin Painting, by londonfx on Oct 23, 2022 20:50:57 GMT 1, Looking for a spin painting. DM me with any options preferably in the Uk. Thanks
Looking for a spin painting. DM me with any options preferably in the Uk. Thanks
|
|
