I guess that's why they did it? Because people who want the real experience will still go in person. As such, they aren't really losing any customers.
The Louvre is a state owned museum. It’s purpose is not to sell tickets, but to disseminate culture. The purpose of the tickets is limiting the visitors to a number that can fit in the building. If many people opt to look at the works online and not in person, the Louvre can reduce the ticket prices without increasing the number of visitors and this would be considered a _success_.
Hmm, sorta. Depending on the country, museums are usually financially supported by both private individuals and the state. Many museums rely on physical visitors to pay ticket prices either for entry or for temporary exhibitions. Also visitor numbers are quite often the metric of success by which funding can then be sought. So yeh, there's some limiting because of space / damage to artworks etc but on the whole museums want more visitors both physical and online.
The Peterson Museum (basically the Louvre of automobiles) did the same -or very close- with wonderful video tours of areas that only paying 150$ would get you to see (The Vault). https://www.youtube.com/user/PetersenMuseum/videos The Seattle flight museum also started a series where the main curator would talk about individual planes in long format, way better experience than looking at photos online. https://www.you…
The Peterson Museum (basically the Louvre of automobiles) did the same -or very close- with wonderful video tours of areas that only paying 150$ would get you to see (The Vault). https://www.youtube.com/user/PetersenMuseum/videos The Seattle flight museum also started a series where the main curator would talk about individual planes in long format, way better experience than looking at photos online. https://www.you…
The Tank Museum (formerly Bovington Tank Museum) is also doing a long-running series of "tank chats" on their exhibits. They don't only give some very interesting details (if you're into that sort of thing) but also give some deep historical context behind the vehicles.
I know this potentially sounds ungrateful, but it’s a shame they didn’t follow the example of Paris Musées and place their collection under CC0. [1] As it is it’s really useful for attribution and generalised research, but it doesn’t give you many options for reuse. [1] https://creativecommons.org/2020/01/10/paris-musees-releases...
The works themselves are all in the public domain, apart perhaps from rare exceptions.
So my understanding is that it is the photographs of those works that are copyrighted. In my view it goes against the spirit of public domain to use this in order to restrict the use of the collections put online.
That explains why original signed artworks are valuable, not really why NFTs are valuable after all if I wanted to buy a Jack Dorsey signature tweet for two million dollars or a Beeple collage for 70 million I'm sure Beeple would have gladly put it on a usb stick, signed me a card, printed it billboard sized and driven it to my house while taking me out for a steak dinner It's absolutely nebulous what the 'digital' p…
I tend to view the NFT craze as just that, a craze. It started as a massive and intriguing stunt that spread far and wide because of how absurd it all seems. It’s the perfect storm of “I don’t get this at all” combined with “you just don’t understand how revolutionary this is”. You also have the appeal of “why don’t I just make a few of these NFT things and make some money too?” Additionally, I’ve read that the suppo…
You're missing an important use case here: Money laundry. While regular cryptocurrency is quite useful for this, it comes with the drawback of having a well-defined market value at any given point in time, making it harder to cook the books since there is some "ground truth" to get audited against. NFTs don't have that limitation - the price at any moment can be as high or as low as you need it to be to shift any amount of money, instantly, from anywhere in the world to anywhere else in the world. Regular art has historically been used for this too, as has high-end real estate (basically anything where rich "eccentrics" can pay whatever they want for something), but these come with the hassle of needing to also move a physical good, sign deeds, set up companies - plus there is a limited supply of these, limiting the bandwidth with which you can shift money around. NFTs overcome all these limitations, it's an entirely digital, global, endless supply of goods with no fixed marked value and a plausible cover story of why it's worth millions. If you're in charge of bookkeeping at a cartel, NFTs are probably the most exciting thing that has happened this decade if not longer.
I’m confused who this is for. It’s not the same experience seeing art online. Part of what makes the Louvre or other museums special is being in a beautiful and decorated historically important space. It puts you in a different mindset where you can wander, ponder, and appreciate. I’m no Luddite but a digital experience simply can’t recreate that, at least not today.
> Part of what makes the Louvre or other museums special is being in a beautiful and decorated historically important space. This is true in theory, in practice you will meet arrogant and unhelpful museum guides, tons upon tons of people not respecting all the basic rules (no flash, be relatively quite, etc) and a labyrinthine place which can give you anxiety if you are just visiting one day and want to see as much a…
I tend to view the NFT craze as just that, a craze. It started as a massive and intriguing stunt that spread far and wide because of how absurd it all seems. It’s the perfect storm of “I don’t get this at all” combined with “you just don’t understand how revolutionary this is”. You also have the appeal of “why don’t I just make a few of these NFT things and make some money too?” Additionally, I’ve read that the suppo…
You're missing an important use case here: Money laundry. While regular cryptocurrency is quite useful for this, it comes with the drawback of having a well-defined market value at any given point in time, making it harder to cook the books since there is some "ground truth" to get audited against. NFTs don't have that limitation - the price at any moment can be as high or as low as you need it to be to shift any amo…
I have no problem believing this. Nonetheless, I'd like to see a good hypothetical example to really understand how it would work. Would the seller have to be in on the deal? Probably, or not?