Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 23 Jul 2013 (Tuesday) 20:07
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

10 most expensive photographs in the world

 
Gomar
Senior Member
Avatar
527 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Sep 2010
Location: NYC
     
Jul 23, 2013 20:07 |  #1

http://freeyork.org …-photographs-in-the-world (external link)

What a bunch of bunk!
Except Billy the Kid, the rest are junk.

Why no Abe Lincoln, Marilyn, JFK assassination, 9/11?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Luxornv
Member
223 posts
Joined Nov 2012
     
Jul 23, 2013 23:06 |  #2

Wow, some people overpay for their art. Seriously, if the Rhein II picture was taken by my camera, I'd have probably deleted it. There's nothing interesting going on there, and it's really not an interesting landscape, sky, or anything for that matter. Also not sure why anyone would pay over $3mil for a picture of a supermarket.


Canon Rebel T3i - 18-55mm Kit lens- Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 - Rokinon 8mm Fish Eye - Canon 40mm f/2.8 Pancake - Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Picture ­ North ­ Carolina
Gaaaaa! DOH!! Oops!
9,158 posts
Likes: 166
Joined Apr 2006
Location: North Carolina
     
Jul 24, 2013 09:15 |  #3

Where's that amateurish, crappy, highly-overrated picture of that tricycle? I thought for sure it would be in there.


Website (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RTPVid
Goldmember
3,365 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
Location: MN
     
Jul 24, 2013 10:39 |  #4

Composition and vision make great art, not technical perfection.

Aside from those of historical interest (e.g. Billy the Kid), the rest share interesting composition and interesting use of color.

The alternating gray and green in Rhein II may not be your cup of tea, but it is an interesting composition.

The high level of noise in Untitled (Cowboy) is not a technical flaw, but an artistic device.

One by Peter Lik is one of the few Lik photos I actually like (although I can't imagine anyone comparing his typically over-saturated eye-burners to Adams, as the writeup says...)


Tom

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,281 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5580
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Jul 24, 2013 10:50 |  #5

Luxornv wrote in post #16148468 (external link)
Wow, some people overpay for their art. Seriously, if the Rhein II picture was taken by my camera, I'd have probably deleted it. There's nothing interesting going on there, and it's really not an interesting landscape, sky, or anything for that matter. Also not sure why anyone would pay over $3mil for a picture of a supermarket.

I love these kinds of threads. The folks that have never sold anyhting or struggle to get $10.50 for an 8X10 are creating the materpieces and the guy that get millions is the idiot and his work is crap. Yeah you guys got it all firured out :lol::lol::lol:

Did you notice that when you see one of his pieces you can tell its a Gursky right away buy the composition? Do you realize it was the collector that got the $$$$ for the piece and he originally bought it for a lot less. In fact his wise decision to buy that Gursky made him a lot more $$$ than he would have made in the stock market over the same period of time. So who is the idiot? The guy that made the $$$$ or the guy on the sidelines calling him an idiot:lol: Collectors, for the most part, are investors.

Maybe the things you use to determine what is or isn't art are not the right things to be determining that. Maybe spend some time learning things like visual language, two dimensional design and color theory and less time worrying about what camera and lens was used and what shutter speed and f/stop and look more at bodies of work and how they relate to the artist and less about the single image.

We should all be thrilled that finally photographs are demanding that kind of money instead of some kind of petty jealousy. If your work looks like everyone else's there will be little value to it. If you follow the same rules of composition and use the same equipment and are inspired by the same calendar art work then there can be no freshness of vision.

Also the Steichen image is outstanding. Pictorial photography at its best in its hay day.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Calicajun
Goldmember
Avatar
2,931 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 105
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Quartz Hill, CA
     
Jul 24, 2013 11:28 as a reply to  @ airfrogusmc's post |  #6

I have posted pictures just like those on forums before and all I received was a lot of statements telling me what was wrong with the pictures. Nobody ever offered to pay me millions for my bad work.

BTW POTN, please don't stop giving me your opinions and help on the photos I post.:) I don't want to end up looking like the top 10 paid photos.:lol: Though the money would be nice.:D


Remember, Stressed spelled backward is Desserts.:)
Suggestions welcome.
5DIII, EF 50 1.4, EF 40 f2.8, EF 24-105L IS , EF 70-200 f4L IS, 580EX ll

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,281 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5580
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Jul 24, 2013 11:38 |  #7

Calicajun wrote in post #16149905 (external link)
I have posted pictures just like those on forums before and all I received was a lot of statements telling me what was wrong with the pictures. Nobody ever offered to pay me millions for my bad work.

BTW POTN, please don't stop giving me your opinions and help on the photos I post.:) I don't want to end up looking like the top 10 paid photos.:lol: Though the money would be nice.:D

You don't want to make a photograph that looks like one of yours? The biggest compliment a photographer can get is "that looks like one of your images" not its pretty. The easiest thing in photograph to do is to make images that are safe and look like everyone else's work. One of the hardest things to do and what will make your work special is to take photographs that look like your photographs.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Calicajun
Goldmember
Avatar
2,931 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 105
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Quartz Hill, CA
     
Jul 24, 2013 12:31 as a reply to  @ airfrogusmc's post |  #8

Oh, I do want to have my own style but that doesn't mean that my photos/style can't become better with suggestion from other photographers and non-photographers. Always room for improvement.:D


Remember, Stressed spelled backward is Desserts.:)
Suggestions welcome.
5DIII, EF 50 1.4, EF 40 f2.8, EF 24-105L IS , EF 70-200 f4L IS, 580EX ll

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
flashpoint99
Senior Member
411 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2012
     
Jul 24, 2013 12:44 |  #9

Have no issue with what any of these photos sold for. Its not my money. However, lets get real. If these photos were posted in the CC forum and opinions were welcomed you know most of them would be torn apart for one reason or another. "The cowboy is leaving the frame not coming into it" ect ect ect. Seem there are some people with a lot of disposable income. Ive seen hundreds of photographs on this site that convey emotions,feelings, a sence of awe much better than most if not all of these photographs, difference is they found a way to get millions for theirs. Wish I could do the same...Good for them.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Matt ­ M.
Senior Member
Avatar
573 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Eastern Washington
     
Jul 24, 2013 14:02 |  #10

Debating the value of art is about as dead a horse as one can kick, isn't it?
My fascination with things like this resides in trying to find the element(s) of the piece that captivated someone so completely that money was, apparently, no object when they were bidding on it. That includes the art itself, the value of the name of the artist, the possibility of return on investment, etc.


Matt
6d, T3i, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L[COLOR="Black"], 28-80mm, f/2.8-4L, 24-105mm f/4L , 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8 II, 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II, 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II, 600EX-RT, etc.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
iamascientist
Senior Member
Avatar
680 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Mass
     
Jul 24, 2013 14:19 |  #11

Debating astronomically priced art on an internet forum is pretty pointless, the statements of "what garbage" is so predictable. Are they the best images ever made? Nope, but they represent something more then the singular image, whether that's worth millions of dollars is not something for any of us to decide.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kronie
Goldmember
Avatar
2,183 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Jun 2008
     
Jul 24, 2013 14:25 |  #12

Matt M. wrote in post #16150319 (external link)
Debating the value of art is about as dead a horse as one can kick, isn't it?

Pretty much. Just look at this thread.....

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1152295




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sjones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,224 posts
Likes: 187
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
     
Jul 24, 2013 14:25 as a reply to  @ iamascientist's post |  #13

That a photo might get ripped apart in POTN (or similar Internet forums) is potentially as much, if not more, a compliment to that photo than it is a criticism.


Sept 2017-July 2018 (external link)
Manual Focus; only for street photography amateurs...
It's the Photographer (external link) | God Loves Photoshop (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,281 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5580
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Jul 24, 2013 15:18 |  #14

Calicajun wrote in post #16150092 (external link)
Oh, I do want to have my own style but that doesn't mean that my photos/style can't become better with suggestion from other photographers and non-photographers. Always room for improvement.:D

If you listen to to many other people you will only become a watered down version of everything else that out there. ;)

In fact some even think if to many people like their work they are doing something wrong. I'm kinda in that camp.

Spend some time with the greats. Painters, photographers, sculptors and read about their philosophies and what others had to say about them. If its something you don't like try and see if you can understand why its considered good. We have over 2000 years of two dimensional work to show us what is and isn't and there has be plenty written about it. And at least you can still not like something but understand why it is art and considered important. That way you can think for yourself and judge your own works validity instead of relying on others to define you.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,281 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5580
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Jul 24, 2013 15:25 |  #15

Matt M. wrote in post #16150319 (external link)
Debating the value of art is about as dead a horse as one can kick, isn't it?
My fascination with things like this resides in trying to find the element(s) of the piece that captivated someone so completely that money was, apparently, no object when they were bidding on it. That includes the art itself, the value of the name of the artist, the possibility of return on investment, etc.

Gursky wasn't always a name. He started just like everyone else and you are missing the fact its collectors that are buying investments and these are people for the most part have studied art and know what might sell in the future. Understand that these collectors are not looking for stuff that looks like everyone else's. Take a stroll around here and other sites and see if you can tell one photographers work from the next. If you were going to make an investment in art would you invest in something that you could find anywhere?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,848 views & 0 likes for this thread
10 most expensive photographs in the world
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is quadrentau
1463 guests, 240 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.