Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Storm Hits the Art Market

news.artnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 221 posts

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#71

Post by DrewADesign »

slaughtr wrote: post #49
coldcode wrote: post #38

I make an unusual kind of art, but I haven't tried selling it, as you need a stable of interested people, and I can only post it in one place at the moment (a Facebook interest group on tiling, Instagram is overrun with AI, you can't start a new profile without lots of existing supporters). I've considered opening a gallery in my local area just to sell my art (5 million people in the metro, and barely a real commerc…

I have no idea how it works, but if you sold/licensed/created your art to fabric patterns, theres almost certainly a small market there. Clicking through your site (others are right, you could present your work better), I see plenty of “I’d buy a decently priced cool shirt of that pattern”. Sample size of one and all.

You’re much better off selling shirts. The markup on custom printed fabrics isn’t great, and there are plenty of professional fabric pattern designers out there which companies that commission fabric hire as-needed.

Honestly though, unless you’re pretty much only selling in person or too small to notice, someone is probably just going to rip you off using AI and sell shitty knockoffs on Etsy

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#72

Post by melagonster »

criddell wrote: post #31
riazrizvi wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NFTs were about transparency in provenance, using public, tamper-proof records, that replace jurisdictions/authorities with the type of math that enabled cross-border digital payments. Sure there was a spin-off scam industry but there remains a kernel of legitimacy in the concept.

NFTs? They didn’t really solve a problem other than providing something else to gamble with. Nobody bought a low-res pixelated ape image because it stirred something deep in their soul.

People pay money to join fan clubs for K-pop. If there were some electricity sheet will record their name forever, I'm sure someone would pay their money.

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#73

Post by monero-xmr »

CydeWeys wrote: post #58

I'm amazed that the article doesn't discuss the end of ZIRP. The bursting of the art market bubble in mid 2022 coincides exactly with when interest rates started rising following the 'transitory' inflation caused by pandemic relief measures. This was also the same time that we started seeing hiring freezes in tech, the bursting of the luxury watch bubble, etc. It's all tied together, and has the same root cause: It s…

If I was going to buy art as an investment I would only buy the absolute best - old master, Picasso, ancient artifacts with absolutely no question to their authenticity or provenance that would restrict its resale.

Collectibles are very tricky. You want to buy something that isn't a fad. Like a movie prop, you'd want to buy the 100% most legendary movie that is timeless, like something from Casablanca, that has been appreciated decade-after-decade as worthwhile and valuable across many generations and fads. I wouldn't buy an expensive sports or trading card. Something related to Western culture is much safer, like the Magna Carta, or a founding US-related historical document. It's very hard to predict what will remain valuable decades or centuries out, so if something is still valuable now after centuries, it is likely to remain valuable

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#74

Post by Mistletoe »

My brother is an up and coming artist in his field and has had many pieces bought by a billionaire that collects art extensively and has an amazing world-renowned collection. The billionaire has stopped buying art this year. Not just from my brother but stopped buying art completely. And there are many others like that that have stopped buying. That’s one canary in the coal mine to add to my collection that something bad is likely coming. The rich always know first. I’m just hoping we can make it until 2026.

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#75

Post by [deleted] »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #52

The art world is just fine. Pretentious art speculation maybe not so much. In a way, we are actually in a golden age. I lurk on social media accounts of amateur art enthusiasts around the globe with (IMHO) good taste who seek out interesting little known artists and post it on their feeds. I am introduced to so much great art that I probably would have never known about otherwise. If I see something I like, I search…

[deleted]

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#76

Post by irsagent »

msegal wrote: post #57
jandrewrogers wrote: post #52

The art world is just fine. Pretentious art speculation maybe not so much. In a way, we are actually in a golden age. I lurk on social media accounts of amateur art enthusiasts around the globe with (IMHO) good taste who seek out interesting little known artists and post it on their feeds. I am introduced to so much great art that I probably would have never known about otherwise. If I see something I like, I search…

Any good account suggestions?

Second

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#77

Post by like_any_other »

> The gallery had made international stars of artists like Harold Ancart, Korakrit Arunanondchai, and, more recently, Marguerite Humeau

I'll be blunt. I've looked at their works, and those in the article itself.

I won't be losing any sleep over this.

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#78

Post by earlyriser »

msegal wrote: post #57
jandrewrogers wrote: post #52

The art world is just fine. Pretentious art speculation maybe not so much. In a way, we are actually in a golden age. I lurk on social media accounts of amateur art enthusiasts around the globe with (IMHO) good taste who seek out interesting little known artists and post it on their feeds. I am introduced to so much great art that I probably would have never known about otherwise. If I see something I like, I search…

Any good account suggestions?

I have been following:

https://www.instagram.com/piperbangs/

https://www.instagram.com/lauren.krasnoff/

https://www.instagram.com/artcarolinegaudreault/

https://www.instagram.com/gretchen_scherer/

https://www.instagram.com/jakeclarkjakeclark/

https://www.instagram.com/hilary_pecis/

And curating:

https://www.instagram.com/carriescottcurates/

https://www.instagram.com/mary_lynn_buchanan/

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#79

Post by SchemaLoad »

fluoridation wrote: post #59
Ferret7446 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "art as speculation" fad is just a consequence of "inflation is good" economic theory, the same as "real estate as an investment". If you don't let people hold onto cash, they will just find something else to replace it (and of course, it is always the lower classes that have to suffer the secret taxation that is money supply inflation targets).

I don't think so. Speculative markets would arise even in a 0% inflation economy, for the same reason that casinos would. Speculation isn't about storing value, it's about gambling. You have a stronger point with real estate, but real estate isn't as volatile or speculative, usually.

There would be very little reason to speculate on art. There's no reason to believe that the average painting would continually go up in value. In a zero inflation environment you'd expect the market to average zero growth. Some random pieces blowing up in value if the artist becomes famous later, but most would go nowhere.

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#80

Post by SchemaLoad »

UltraSane wrote: post #62
fluoridation wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, man. I work in the space and I was there. NFTs were the second attempt on an earlier idea that had already been discarded as pointless: supply chain management. The problem with NFTs was the same as with supply chains; there's no link between the blockchain and IRL, so the blockchain doesn't really add anything, just makes things more complicated. NFTs were therefore a tool to part fools from their money right f…

NFTs make more sense as digital signatures.

They don't even make sense there. Since you can digitally sign things without blockchains or NFTs.
Post reply on HN