the art perfectly captures someone desperately trying to be relevant despite having nothing to say.
All 5000 Images in Beeple’s $69M Magnum Opus:What I Found Isn’t So Pretty
61–70 of 271 posts
Re: All 5000 Images in Beeple’s $69M Magnum Opus:What I Found Isn’t So Pretty
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Cringe doesn't mean bad - I would say 90% of Jim'll paint it is cringe and awesome https://jimllpaintit.tumblr.com/ There are different kinds of cringe though. Also, Jim'll paint it definitely looks like he's more talented than Beeple. > And having 5000 daily pieces is art by itself. Quantity over quality?
> Quantity over quality? No, performance art. The act of creating that many not-terrible pieces is meaningful on its own.
Well, "not-terrible" is not what I would use to describe this though. Then again I'm not a fan of "you just don't understand this random mix of poo and paint" kind of art. No, I don't get why for example 5000 digital scribbles are more valuable or meaningful than 5000 random posts from deviantart. Or Dilbert comic strips or most recent memes on Reddit, which at least are funny at times. How is this act of creating subpar images supposedly more meaningful than a hoarder's decades-long collection of stuff in their home?
Am I wrong to find creations less valuable when I cannot enjoy them? Call it performance art or whatever else you like, it's still nothing more than an overpriced collection of an artist's shitposts. But alright, it's not my money.
Re: All 5000 Images in Beeple’s $69M Magnum Opus:What I Found Isn’t So Pretty
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Cringe doesn't mean bad - I would say 90% of Jim'll paint it is cringe and awesome https://jimllpaintit.tumblr.com/ There are different kinds of cringe though. Also, Jim'll paint it definitely looks like he's more talented than Beeple. > And having 5000 daily pieces is art by itself. Quantity over quality?
> Quantity over quality? No, performance art. The act of creating that many not-terrible pieces is meaningful on its own.
Except they are all pretty terrible.
Re: All 5000 Images in Beeple’s $69M Magnum Opus:What I Found Isn’t So Pretty
#64I see it as a type of performance art to put all of your work out there (even the really bad stuff you did as a teenager) and preserving that in a time where you can easily delete stuff online (I know it can't really be deleted but probably nobody would start to dig).
I still think the 69M deal was a sham (as described in the other article).
Re: All 5000 Images in Beeple’s $69M Magnum Opus:What I Found Isn’t So Pretty
#65If it makes everyone feel better, they didn't pay almost $70M for the art. The buyer paid almost $70M to post their id, a guid, some metadata and a link to a site neither the buyer or the seller controls. What a world.
Yes, I made a comment explaining how to check this out yourself: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26459621
A Twitter thread explaining how absurd this is: https://twitter.com/jonty/status/1372163423446917122
There's already URL rot going on: https://twitter.com/CheckMyNFT/status/1372253288863825925
Re: All 5000 Images in Beeple’s $69M Magnum Opus:What I Found Isn’t So Pretty
#66A small tangent, I don't get NFTs, what's stopping me from creating a new NFT with beeples image, or if there is hashing involved with beeples image and a couple of pixels changed?
Nothing is stopping you from creating a new cryptocurrency either. That doesn't mean other people will give you $60k for your custom bitcoins.
Only the original NFT (which has a unique address) is cautioned by the artist, that's what gives it value.
Re: All 5000 Images in Beeple’s $69M Magnum Opus:What I Found Isn’t So Pretty
#67A small tangent, I don't get NFTs, what's stopping me from creating a new NFT with beeples image, or if there is hashing involved with beeples image and a couple of pixels changed?
Things aren't given fundamental value by being an NFT so its weird to expect anything other than the value of ownership of what your NFT gives you. If people are buying NFTs thinking they have value simply because they are NFTs they are going to lose money. What an NFT provides is effectively a way to guarantee the artist - in this case. Think of it like a signed original print from an artist - what an NFT does is effectively similar.
Re: All 5000 Images in Beeple’s $69M Magnum Opus:What I Found Isn’t So Pretty
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is this worth $85mil? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suprematist_Composition Honestly looks like a piece of shit to me, something my child could do. Value of art doesn't have to do with skill.
Is there a painting you think is worth 85 million?
Anything Leonardo even touched should be worth at least that.
Re: All 5000 Images in Beeple’s $69M Magnum Opus:What I Found Isn’t So Pretty
#69Modern “art” is very often offensive, but usually that is seen as a good thing. It’s “irreverent”, it “challenges norms”. I suppose the problem is that this particular hack challenges the wrong norms?
Re: All 5000 Images in Beeple’s $69M Magnum Opus:What I Found Isn’t So Pretty
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your observation: > I bet someone would buy a preserved notebook of someone semi-famous with 5000 pages of drawings, mostly regardless of contents ...is, I think, kind of what the article author is trying to get at. Beeple is arguably semi-famous not for his art, but for getting a staggering price for these 5000 images. It's as if someone bought a preserved notebook with 5000 pages drawings for tens of millions of do…
They're a peculiar ART bubble. This is exactly how art galleries and fine art sales work. If this notebook was physical instead, nobody would be tremendously surprised -- if you were, you just don't get art.
Being one of the highest prices ever paid at auction for a piece of art, i think it would definitely raise a lot of eyebrows. If not more. At least as an nft, it can be attributed to the crypto bubble.
If an art book from a completely unknown artist sold his art at a Christie's auction for $69m, i think everyone would assume something nefarious was going on.