There is a sucker born every minute. Grin.
Some times I wonder if the "Art World" of museum directors are simply trying to justify their existence with self important dribble, and have lost all sense of reality.
Imagine what that $1 million (Canadian) could have done to help the homeless, troubled youth or the mentally ill?
These prints are indeed cibachrome backlights.
Jeff Wall bought the same Ilford Processor that I have in my shop , except his is quite larger.
This machine is dedicated to his work and maybe a few select friends that he allows to print on the machine.
I have heard that Jeff may be indeed one of the worlds largest user of this Ciba back light product. The numbers that I have heard of his inventory purchases of this product this last year is staggering.
I am not sure how he is exposing the material but I would not be suprised if he did not buy a lightjet from cymbolic sciences for his photographic output.As well he would need a full blown mounting facility to accomodate the face mounting of these large pieces that he is famous for.
This investment in *photo gear* is not suprising to me as Ed Burtynsky basically has built a lab to fit his vision , with chromiras and large processors and finally the mounting shops to produce the very large work that both these artists produce.
The argument of whether the photographs are worth the price that these fellows are recieving, I will leave to the photo experts.
But I really do admire these two great living Canadian Artists who invest everything they own into their art.
While I certainly understand that the cost of producing any work will factor into its selling price it appears that the medium is the message here. I have a hard time understanding how an image that doesn't appear to me to have been worth $1m AU when the shutter was released made that journey in his lab.
Originally Posted by Bob Carnie
I understand that some works of art are worth a million dollars because the artist has a reputation and the cost of production is high. A Chilhuly installation...a large, public mural or sculpture, etc.
I understand that some works of art are worth a million because history has bestowed cache and status on the maker and uniqueness or rarity of the work has raised the value of a piece.
In this case, I'm at a loss to understand why a buyer would bite on that price for a work buy a living artist, of a relatively pedestrian exposure, where the scarcity is artificial and the cost of production is not *that* high.
I applaud Hall's ability to market himself and have no reason to doubt his dedication to his craft but this doesn't seem like a sensible purchase to me.
Was the photographer the Meuseam director's son in law or something?
Color Film always existed. It's just the world was always black and white till recently.
I have a feeling that none of the comments here come from anyone (other than Bob Carnie) who has actually seen a Jeff Wall photograph.
The couple that I have seen are spectacular - not for everyone's taste - but really intriguing and impressive.
The 2 metre by 2.5 metre size of this one means that it is one of his mid-size pieces, and unlike just about anyone else's work I have seen, the large size is beneficial, and integral to the work.
You certainly cannot get much of an appreciation of his work from small, internet images.
I'd suggest seeing some of his work, before you pass judgment.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
It could be the very definition of spectacular and still not make sense to me at that price. I understand what you're saying but I think it's tangential to a discussion of the nature of monetary valuation.
Originally Posted by MattKing
Can't help thinking back to the "Tate brick affair" of the 60's. Roger shurely will remember that one.
Don't be silly!! A picture of some person untangling ropes would only be worth 10 dollars!!
Originally Posted by Mick Fagan
Correction: it was 1974. Google for "tate + bricks"
I've decided to go one better- I will be selling myself, a Canadian Photographer, for $1,000,000 Aussie Dozzies. First preference is to the Australian government, 'cause boy- I'd sure like to move back over there! I'm not quite 2X2.5 meters, but close (about 2X 0.5 meters). That's gotta be better than a photo, eh?
Oh, BTW- I'm not lit from behind, but I have been known to get pretty lit up on occasion
Last edited by timbo10ca; 12-16-2006 at 04:35 PM. Click to view previous post history.