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

81–90 of 221 posts

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#81

Post by dreamcompiler »

gonzobonzo wrote: post #66
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…

I remember IBM making huge claims about using the blockchain for supply chain management. For instance[1]: > A recent pilot by KPMG, Merck, Walmart and IBM using blockchain injects new trust into the system by reducing the time it takes to trace prescription drugs from 16 weeks to just two seconds. It was impressive how many people uncritically took these claims as facts. [1] https://www.ibm.com/solutions/blockchain-…

A blockchain is the world's slowest database. The idea that a blockchain could speed up anything is laughable.

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#82

Post by jppope »

As I understand it, much of the art market is based around the ability to purchase a "valuable" piece of art on the private markets let it appreciate then "donate" it to a museum or non-profit for a lucrative tax write off. At least thats the hustle as I understand it. I could totally see that in jeopardy based on liquidity and the markets.

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#83

Post by cortesoft »

monero-xmr wrote: post #73
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…

The problem with your strategy is that the items you listed have very little upside; yes, the prices won't collapse, but they also wont go up a ton. Their prices have reached somewhat of an equilibrium.

A lot of collectors are trying to find something they can buy for cheap and then sell when it goes up in price by a lot. If you want that, you have to pick something that hasn't had its price hit an equilibrium yet. You need to take a risk on something new.

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#84

Post by fluoridation »

dublinben wrote: post #67
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…

What do you think the market is for this kind of digital art? Do you see this style of work attracting an audience elsewhere? How much is it selling for? I'm far from an expert, but I do occasionally buy original artwork. The sheer multitude of works you are displaying (more than one a day!) devalues what you are doing. It suggests that these can be churned out with relatively little effort. If you are really posting…

I didn't want to criticize, but since you've already opened the door: these are interesting to me as sheer sensory stimulation, but the problem that might dissuade a lot of people is that there's no structure to most of the pieces (save for the ones that are based on distorting an existing image). Without structure there's no narrative, and no reason for someone to become interested in any given piece beyond, as I said, sensory stimulation. On that note, most the color palettes are very tasteful; if coldcode is picking them algorithmically, that's pretty impressive.

Let's be honest here: the craft here is not on the images themselves. It's on the algorithms that are producing them. A solution to the problem of quantity would be to make the algorithms available to play with. I could see someone going "okay, I want something sort of like [1], but made my own. I'll toy with the parameters until I get something I like and then order a print." Two or three sample images for each algorithm, instead of six years' worth of images, would work way better.

[1] https://andrewwulf.com/detail/the-pinecone.html

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#85

Post by dreamcompiler »

noman-land wrote: post #37
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.

Non-fungible tokens are not about payment, they are about cryptographic ownership of uniqueness.

Non-fungible tokens are about ownership in the same way those $40 certificates that say a star is named for you are about ownership.

Nobody cares about your precious little certificate, but if it makes you happy, buy it.

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#86

Post by monero-xmr »

cortesoft wrote: post #83
monero-xmr wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The problem with your strategy is that the items you listed have very little upside; yes, the prices won't collapse, but they also wont go up a ton. Their prices have reached somewhat of an equilibrium. A lot of collectors are trying to find something they can buy for cheap and then sell when it goes up in price by a lot. If you want that, you have to pick something that hasn't had its price hit an equilibrium yet. Y…

Collectibles have a lot of friction, and being physical they have a lot of middlemen and questions. If I want to speculate on an investment, even property would be far more liquid, let alone something disambiguated like company stock. I think investing in physical collectibles for a quick flip is pretty dumb. Why not buy domains related to the same subject? Far easier

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#87

Post by kazinator »

The art world at large? Or the traditional business environment of pretentious art hucksters?

I just want to know the bottom line: is this good, bad or indifferent for the actual struggling artists. Or upside for some, downside for others? And, which struggling arists; how many out of the multitude associated with what outcome?

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#88

Post by Guestmodinfo »

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…

Hi, Can you plz tell me the places where you lurk around for the beautiful art pieces. I have a friend who does amazing "slice of Life" photography. I want to showcase it somewhere that can sell their work. Also please let us see a photo of your art pieces from Denmark. Thank you

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#89

Post by fluoridation »

SchemaLoad wrote: post #79
fluoridation wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>There's no reason to believe that the average painting would continually go up in value.

If I had to guess, on average works of art go down in value, simply because of how much is produced.

>Some random pieces blowing up in value if the artist becomes famous later, but most would go nowhere.

That's exactly where speculation comes from. It's the same as any form of gambling. On average you're losing money, but every once in a while one lucky guy makes off like a bandit.

Re: The Storm Hits the Art Market

#90

Post by throwawayoldie »

gonzobonzo wrote: post #66
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…

I remember IBM making huge claims about using the blockchain for supply chain management. For instance[1]: > A recent pilot by KPMG, Merck, Walmart and IBM using blockchain injects new trust into the system by reducing the time it takes to trace prescription drugs from 16 weeks to just two seconds. It was impressive how many people uncritically took these claims as facts. [1] https://www.ibm.com/solutions/blockchain-…

People have a tendency to uncritically take techies' claims as facts.

[Stares aggressively in the direction of gen AI.]

Post reply on HN