What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
143 Comments
- CMaff24, on 10/10/2007, -4/+94How ballin' would it be to have all of these in one giant room. A room dug out of a giant diamond. Or inside a diamond cave. Straight ballin.
- psevium, on 10/10/2007, -2/+51Counting down the list would've been better
- anarchytv, on 10/10/2007, -5/+48being an artist myself, i'm all for art, but these prices are obscene in the grossest sense of the word
- AriaStar, on 10/10/2007, -8/+50I find it to be very selfish to buy pieces of priceless art to stick in your own home and deny others enjoyment of the piece. Buy prints, giclees, whatever, but at least lend the pieces to museums. Permanently.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -4/+33No love for Dali, shame.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -3/+25If only the artists got the money for THEIR paintings...
- jlimon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+19I want so much to not like this comment.. but gosh darnit I do.. Internets to you, sir!
- ralph123, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13I didn't know it was up for sale recently.
- tybris, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it.
Publilius Syrus
(~100 BC) - iashraf, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12@psevium: At least it's all on one page!
- crash128, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9The internet (and to a certain extent print) doesn't usually ever do justice to paintings. It's like 100% better to see them in person. Maybe 200%.
I saw Irises once. That .jpg ain't Irises. The colors were vibrant and joyous (and for some reason a little troubling, don't know why). Got absolutely nothin' from seeing it on the computer screen.
So, to summarize, why NOT go to a museum today? It's sunday, sometimes they let you in for free, ya cheap tech bastards. Most of the time they're air conditioned. Kind of like a movie theatre, but the pictures aren't moving. If you're near philly vg's Rain is at the pma, as well as Prometheus being Bound or something. - nekteo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8i do think this is a better list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_paintings
- hiPpymIck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7wiki list
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_paintings#List_of_highest_prices_paid_at_auctions_or_private_sales_.28inflation_adjusted.29.. - UGM2099, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Many have, especially recently with the proliferation of the gallery scene. Coincidentally art being created today is largely unimportant.
- tehWyman, on 08/19/2009, -0/+6I think the only reason the first one is on top is because it was sold and bought most recently..
- TygerrTygerr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Pollocks.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Things I would put in a yard sale bringing that kind of money makes me question both the core of my being and the sanity of the human race. Sure a couple were "neat" and one or two I would like to hang on a wall but come on... I suppose price is relative to wealth. Treating a million dollars like ten dollars must be a nice perspective to live life from.
- extratired, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4makes you wonder what the mona lisa or la guernica would be worth.
as for the little anekdote in the comments about picasso paying his meal with a sketch, my distant family owned a painting goods store in brussels around 1900 and it was common that artists paid for their supplies with their works. the store itself didn't last very long into the 20th century but they always kept the paintings. you don't even want to know how rich they are now... - ladyarcher85, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6oh well i guess they wish to buy those things and horde it for themselves, but i think that those belong in a museum where everyone can have the pleasure of looking at them. copies are always ok to decorate one''s house with. just my thoughts anyway.
- Khook20, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5And this list doesn't even include the black market
- whatthefu, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6I would love to have #4, Van Gogh's painting.
- Giever, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I'd rather have The Blue Duck.
- Frosty122, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4i love number one.
- replikhant, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4who would sell his Dali´s?
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I don't think its ever been up for sale - as far as I know it was given to French royalty, and has been owned by the government ever since. A guy did steal it and they probably did pay to get it back, but its never been disclosed.
I doubt you will ever be able to buy a Leonardo, or Michelangelo - most are owned by countries, or the vatican, not individuals. However, a few bad quality sketches have been sold for more than $10 million. - UGM2099, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4The last time someone paid money for it was a long long time ago.
- yosempai, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4If there are no patrons, there is no art.
- wilhoitm, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4The Mona Lisa is not included because it is priceless or in geek talk it has infinite value.
- easybakelovin, on 10/10/2007, -6/+9but why didn't you?
I'm not saying you are ignorant but when you say things like that , you sound ignorant. - b3mus3d, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3just curious, what makes a piece of art 'important'?
- akira117, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Dead people don't need money.
- asdmalol, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Most Pollock's paintings contain complex algoritmic patterns (the hell if I know what am I talking about) that make them perfectly distinguishable from fakes. I don't think you could paint one.
- diggdong, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4It's a slang term of a slang term. Essentially, "ballin" is where one walks around accomplishing tasks with balls in your hand.
- IBadassI, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4What about the Mona Lisa, I thought that would be the most expensive.
- artofwar420, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2But are they selling that?
- PlasticSolution, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'm sure you eagerly donate every cent of your disposable income, right?
- drgmdp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2you should be happy, paintings of flowers in a jar are really cheap and you can afford them
- replikhant, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Exactly, the most important works of art are not for sale.
- mishabear, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2LOL! At first I thought you were calling Diggers a derogatory term you call Polish people.
- slizzered, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4by the same logic, you could just put a giclee or whatever in the museum for people to enjoy.
- Xill, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I think the point is that Art is priceless. How much would you give to hear a lost Symphony of Beethoven for example? I would gladly give everything I have.
- kufurex, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I am glad that Pollock's work is hidden in someone's private collection. Comparing this modern art crap to the classical masters is a joke, and I'm not talking about Picasso.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2that piece of garbage is not a fractal
- mishabear, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3You want Art? See Thomas Kinkade!
http://www.thomaskinkade.com
/sarcasm - darkixion, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3"While American businessmen snap up Van Goghs for the price of a hospital wing"
- UGM2099, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2He couldn't in 2007 and definitely not in the 1940s.
- wilhoitm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I am going increase the size and then print these out with my color laser printer and frame them and put them on my wall! They just wont be originals. ;-)
- crazyman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Couldn't agree more. You are missing out on so much seeing these on the internet.
- irgeorge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1$1 billion really isn't all that much money to be honest, especially spread over the period from 1889-2006 when these sales happened. That's only about $9,000,000 a year, which is like a drop in the ocean...
- slizzered, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2The prices are high, but when it comes to thinking about the value of a work of art by an established "master", it makes more sense to think of the work as if it is a very rare form of currency that can never be duplicated, sort of like a rare postage stamp, rather than simply as some paint on a canvas. It seems almost arbitrary, sure, but so does the value of a one-hundred dollar bill, (the value of which is no longer staked to a gold standard), when you stop to consider it. With just a few exceptions, the people who buy such works do it as a way of investing money. After all, it is a much sexier way of diversifying your financial portfolio than most other ways I can think of. Serious collectors often stash rare, expensive works away where they will never see the light of day again, so you can't really say that the point is to show off your bank account.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 143 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is