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.