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 News & Rumors Photography Industry News 
Thread started 10 Dec 2014 (Wednesday) 18:06
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Peter Lik sells photo for $6.5 million

 
benji25
Goldmember
Avatar
1,016 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 90
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
Post edited over 4 years ago by benji25.
     
Feb 18, 2015 14:05 |  #76

kenwood33 wrote in post #17437756 (external link)
There are better ways to spend 6.5million such as help out those in need and less fortunate...

The same could be said about what you spent on your cameras and gear. Probably your car and house too.


Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
digirebelva
Goldmember
Avatar
3,972 posts
Gallery: 367 photos
Likes: 1574
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Virginia
     
Feb 18, 2015 16:07 as a reply to  @ post 17437756 |  #77

And the US has spent $15 TRILLLION on just that since 1960, with little to no effect. So your point is...
The only person who is responsible for how much they spend, and what they spend it on is themselves. You may not like it, but its not YOUR money they are spending. If it where, well then, I would be right beside complaining about it.
And you ASSUME that the person doesn't do that already. Personally, I don't know either, and until we actually know who the person was/is that bought it (if the sale actually happened by the way) we might should leave out complaining about how someone else spends their money. Cause it tends to come across sounding like petty jealously.


EOS 6d, 7dMKII, Tokina 11-16, Tokina 16-28, Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8, Sigma 17-50 F/2.8, Canon 24-70mm F/2.8L, Canon 70-200 F/2.8L, Mixed Speedlites and other stuff.

When it ceases to be fun, it will be time to walk away
Website (external link) | Fine Art America (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheInfamousGreedo
Goldmember
1,631 posts
Likes: 4040
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Summit County, Colorado
     
Feb 18, 2015 20:32 |  #78

DetlevCM wrote in post #17405211 (external link)
And here is the simple reality - they biggest lie that everybody is told in the "western world" (and maybe in the rest too, but I can only speak for Europe):
"If you work hard you can earn a lot of money" - nope. In the past (century only) if you worked hard you could possibly live, but it still matters who you know... which school you went to.
It isn't about quality....
I have seen research papers which are worthless - still published...
If you look at many politicians and especially their public appearance/statements you wonder whether they ever obtained any education...
(Very interesting to see that students from state schools do better than privately educated ones: http://www.theguardian​.com …-school-pupils-university (external link) , http://www.theguardian​.com …niversity-private-schools (external link) )

It isn't about quality of work (or art) - it is about making the most noise, bragging and lying.
Neither of which are positive qualities in any way.

Incidentally, if you have listened to Nick Hanauer's TED talk, you may have noticed that the admitted that his wealth was down to luck - and that is all there was to it. Luck. And this is true for most - a bit of luck at the start, then once they have amassed some initial wealth comes the tax evasion and other anti-social means by which they avoid contributing.
Those same people also do their best to pay wages so low that people need top ups from social benefits to even survive.
(And no, I don't want to hear that idiotic statement of "get another job" because there just isn't enough work for everybody - communism tried no unemployment and paid people to do nothing because there wasn't enough work - we need to have a good discussion what a suitable solution is and a social state is so far the best we have, though that is disintegrating...)

But coming back to your key statement of earning money:
Many do not earn their income through honest means.
I don't mind the Lufthansa pilot earning 100.000€+ per year - given he has a job with a lot of responsibility.
But what does the investment banker do? Well, he robs society for the benefit of a few "clients" creating absolutely no value (his money doesn't correspond to anything but numbers on a screen...) while he walks around with an attitude that everybody should bow down to him.
It just makes you wish for a "modern days French Revolution"...

In contrast, many small and medium sized companies that produce real wealth and benefits in the form of tangible products and services struggle to survive in a race to the bottom of lower prices.
Look at the small independent café vs. a large multinational café chain... (if you find a good independent café you start to appreciate what good coffee really is.)
At the same time, these small companies don't pay their managers insane amounts of money - nor is their management detached from staff.

And one can go on and on...

Incidentally, if you look at society as a whole, you find that higher equality leads to a better life for all:
https://www.ted.com …ard_wilkinson?l​anguage=en (external link)
(Yes, a millionaire in the UK lives worse than a "poor" person in Norway or Denmark)

Incidentally, the most unequal countries are those that perpetuate the lie and myth of "tickle down economics" - I refer you to Nick Hanauer's talk again as the best evidence why the idea behind it is stupid.
But even if one were naive enough to think it could work - well, it has been tried and it failed over and over again...

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this. It's very reassuring that people are in touch with reality and that my thoughts aren't always cynical and self-doubting.


TJ Simon (external link)
flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kenwood33
Goldmember
2,587 posts
Likes: 20
Joined Jul 2005
     
Feb 19, 2015 09:13 |  #79

benji25 wrote in post #17437766 (external link)
The same could be said about what you spent on your cameras and gear. Probably your car and house too.

Not true at all, house and car are essential items - can't live on the street and can't walk to work. Camera is to used make $.


Gearlist

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
Goldmember
Avatar
1,016 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 90
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
Post edited over 4 years ago by benji25.
     
Feb 19, 2015 09:18 |  #80

kenwood33 wrote in post #17439001 (external link)
Not true at all, house and car are essential items - can't live on the street and can't walk to work. Camera is to used make $.

You could rent an apartment or buy a cheaper house. You can take public transport or have a cheaper car or a bike.

You could also have a cheaper camera and still make money with it. I could find 50 people who would say "YOU SPENT $2,500 on a camera and $5k on other gear and accessories? That money would be better spent giving to the United Way!"

You choose to spend what you consider to be a normal amount of money on things you consider normal. There are needy people in this world who have no home or have to walk a mile to get to a well for water. What is more important - you spending more for a FF camera vs a crop or the you donating the savings and supplying them with clean water or medications for a year?

You are placing your morals/values on other people. It is a two way street and in the end it is a subjective street unique to each person.


Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sandpiper
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,171 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 50
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Merseyside, England
     
Feb 19, 2015 10:58 |  #81

kenwood33 wrote in post #17439001 (external link)
Not true at all, house and car are essential items - can't live on the street and can't walk to work. Camera is to used make $.

The point still holds true though. As above, was the car new, the best you could afford, or a 10 year old economy car which is cheap to run? Even if your house is the smallest and cheapest you can possibly fit your family in, I am guessing you have nice furniture, TV, ornaments etc., most of which you could do without, or buy used for less. Have you ever taken a vacation? Staying at home and donating that money to charity could have changed lives and even saved lives in the third world. The same goes for eating out, going for a drink with friends, visiting the theatre and so on.

Every little you spend on something that isn't absolutely essential, could be argued that the money could be better spent given to charity. That meal out is just one nice meal for you, but donating the money to charity could feed a third world family for a month, or provide medicines that save lives.

Don't get me wrong, I am not criticizing you for spending your money on nice things, we all do it. But it is hypocritical to do so and moan that somebody else should be giving all their money to charity instead of buying what they want to spend their money on.

Yes, of course it is true that $6.5m would make a huge difference in the third world, I don't dispute that. But it isn't for us to decide how the buyer should use their money, and for all we know they may donate large sums to charity as well as buying such expensive things for themselves. Most of us give to charities as well as buying nice things for ourselves, as I am sure you do, but we could all give more by making a few minor sacrifices.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mkopec1
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Mar 2015
     
Mar 13, 2015 09:39 |  #82

DetlevCM wrote in post #17403727 (external link)
Well, to some extent it is - especially today.
The dynamic range of today's sensors allows you to take photographs that would be a lot harder if not impossible to take in the same way 10 years ago.
Look at the improvement in lenses with regards to chromatic aberrations, distortion - which all also play a part. And lastly, the computer used to post-process.

Art is the idea and the setup (where required).
Technology is the tools used.

But that technology does not run itself. I could take 20 photographers with the same $10,000 photography gear to the same place and get 20 different images, some good, some horrible. I could also give 20 photographers the same raw file and get 20 different results in post processing. Some good and some horrible. So while there is definitely the tech behind capturing the image and processing, there is also a huge human element behind it all.

I dont buy that photography is not an art.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,340 posts
Gallery: 205 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4138
Joined Dec 2008
     
Mar 13, 2015 10:16 |  #83

I think Lik is an excellent photographer, but over-hyped. That being said, I won't begrudge him his success. Good for him. I wish I had the same skill, business sense, and ambition. Some luck may play into it as well. But again, good for him.

For some reason, I don't feel the same way about some sports figures and the amount of money they make. It makes me ill.

But that's just me.


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elitejp
Goldmember
1,709 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 189
Joined Mar 2008
     
Mar 14, 2015 23:44 |  #84

There is nothing wrong with Lik selling his photo for 6.5 mill or even 65 mill. And there is nothing wrong with someone paying that price. To each their own. But I think we should not criticize how a buyer spends his money (given that its within the law). Maybe he does give to the poor, maybe not. Nontheless im more concerned with how I spend my money and who i can help.

As for DetLev's post all I can say to that is try being lazy and earning money. The chance to be successful and earn more tomorrow than you do today will increase greatly with the amount of hard work that you put into it.


6D; canon 85mm 1.8, Tamron 24-70mm VC, Canon 135L Canon 70-200L is ii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DetlevCM
Goldmember
Avatar
3,431 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Europe
Post edited over 4 years ago by DetlevCM. (2 edits in all)
     
Mar 15, 2015 05:07 |  #85

elitejp wrote in post #17475434 (external link)
There is nothing wrong with Lik selling his photo for 6.5 mill or even 65 mill. And there is nothing wrong with someone paying that price. To each their own. But I think we should not criticize how a buyer spends his money (given that its within the law). Maybe he does give to the poor, maybe not. Nontheless im more concerned with how I spend my money and who i can help.

As for DetLev's post all I can say to that is try being lazy and earning money. The chance to be successful and earn more tomorrow than you do today will increase greatly with the amount of hard work that you put into it.

Keep telling yourself that lie... there is ZERO relationship between earnings and how hard people work.
Wealth isn't earned - it is inherited or stolen from the public ("investment banking" where the public picks up the tab or through tax evasion).
You also might want to have a look at the statistic on wealth distribution - the parasites at the top line their pockets while the overall population has less and less. http://www.oecd.org …inequalitykeeps​rising.htm (external link)
(Doesn't help that I live in one of the worst countries to be in in Europe...)

As I said to someone else before: You possibly believe all the service personal working as waiters who can hardly make ends meet and depend on tips to survive because their greedy employers line their own pockets are not hard working.

Here is a nice example of a certain group eventually lining their own pockets:
http://www.theguardian​.com …hiefs-cannot-be-justified (external link)
(But the same system applies to management everywhere else...)

Enough people work hard and are paid a pittance while enough people "at the top" don't produce any good work yet walk away with large pay.

And just to add an edit:
PhD pay increase by just under 1% after 4 years in which is was frozen - that is despite PhD students doing most of the research work and producing all the work that universities use to show off. (They are a major source of income for universities.)
Academic staff also only received small wage increases over the last year - while at the same time being chronically overworked because more staff would cost too much.... at the same time, those "at the top" line their pockets...

Edit - one more link to another article on some of the underlying issues:
http://www.sueddeutsch​e.de …armut-ist-teuer-1.2392438 (external link)


5D MK II AF Satisfaction Poll | Reduced Kit List
A Basic Guide to Photographyexternal link | Websiteexternal link
Flickrexternal link | Artflakesexternal link | Blurbexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,340 posts
Gallery: 205 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4138
Joined Dec 2008
     
Mar 15, 2015 06:42 |  #86

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ETS
Senior Member
Avatar
750 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 615
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Cocoa, Florida
     
Mar 15, 2015 06:55 |  #87

LV Moose wrote in post #17475700 (external link)
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

This.


Fuji X-T2,5D MKII,Rebel XTi
17-40L, 70-200 F4L, 400mm F5.6L, 100mm F2.8L, Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art
580 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
J_TULLAR
Goldmember
Avatar
3,011 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Post edited over 4 years ago by J_TULLAR.
     
Mar 15, 2015 09:39 |  #88

LV Moose wrote in post #17475700 (external link)
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

THIS THIS. I think someones realized the degree field they chose doesn't actually make any money LOL.


Model Mayhem (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DetlevCM
Goldmember
Avatar
3,431 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Europe
     
Mar 15, 2015 10:25 |  #89

J_TULLAR wrote in post #17475824 (external link)
THIS THIS. I think someones realized the degree field they chose doesn't actually make any money LOL.

As I suspect you refer to me:

What a sad world you must live in if money is all you live for.
Well, I have "good news" for you - thankfully money is 100% worthless as an indicator for anything. You can be "poor" and live a longer, healthier and happier life in the right countries - I will refer once again to the Richard Wilkinson talk on income inequality: http://www.ted.com …ard_wilkinson?l​anguage=en (external link)
(One more reason to move back to continental Europe...)

I would especially like to point you at the graphs on this page: http://www.equalitytru​st.org.uk/resources/sp​irit-level (external link)
-> Moving to the UK from Germany was a significant DROP (!!) in living standards and quality of life. And the US also fears a LOT (!!) worse than continental Europe. Scandinavia scores very highly.

And in case you wonder about my "degree field": it developed into chemistry, coming from a background in mathematics.
It was never meant to be a get rich scheme - scientific research is more fun and enjoyable if science comes first.
Science should be done for the sake of science - NOT for the sake of making money. The former brings benefit, the latter produces noise. (And unfortunately most of what is produced nowadays is just noise... Heck, commercialisation has ruined science in many ways...)

But on the plus side: Those who get lucky and research the right topic will be remembered for their achievements.
Leibniz for his differential notation, Mendeleev for the periodic table, Euler in mathematics Humboldt for his description of the world...
Sadly science nowadays only rarely offers the ability for great breakthroughs and is just a slow evolutionary process....


5D MK II AF Satisfaction Poll | Reduced Kit List
A Basic Guide to Photographyexternal link | Websiteexternal link
Flickrexternal link | Artflakesexternal link | Blurbexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,340 posts
Gallery: 205 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4138
Joined Dec 2008
     
Mar 15, 2015 10:34 |  #90

DetlevCM wrote in post #17475866 (external link)
As I suspect you refer to me:

What a sad world you must live in if money is all you live for......

You seem the one obsessing about money, at least judging by your diatribes.


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

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

22,521 views & 27 likes for this thread
Peter Lik sells photo for $6.5 million
FORUMS News & Rumors Photography Industry News 
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 astrobalcony
749 guests, 236 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.