Beeple's 5,000-Day Digital Art Collection Sells for $60.25 Million (theblockcrypto.com) 18
Popular digital artist Beeple's 5,000-day collection has sold for $60.25 million, making it one of the highest art auction sales ever. From a report: Christie's website shows that the auction concluded with a $9 million premium, which is a percentage of the final (or "hammer") price. The sale, hosted by British auction house Christie's, received a total of 353 bids. The collection of 5,000 pieces titled Everydays: The First 5000 Days, has been called "one of the most unique bodies of work to emerge in the history of digital art." To create the collection, Beeple produced a new work of art every single day for 14 years, starting in May 2007.
Re: (Score:3)
It means what it means in practice. Owning it just means being the person for whom ownership is recognized by consensus. And to the owner, even the owner that spent 60 million, that's enough. That's what they paid for.
The implication that you're some how lifting the veil on something everybody involved in this doesn't know is eye rolling and boring.
Re: (Score:2)
Whose consensus? The people auctioning it, the buyer, a sparse crowd of like spectators with more money than sense - Did I miss anyone?
No, pointing out that the whole thing is like an inbred family orgy isn't lifting any veils or stopping any presses. What else did you expect to find in the comments here? What veils can you lift?
Re: (Score:2)
It means what it means in practice. Owning it just means being the person for whom ownership is recognized by consensus.
A consensus of no more than 353? That's insignificent, and that's a consensus I think you'll find a lot more substantial.
I have a tulip bulb. (Score:1)
Art's job is to show us what we can not see. (Score:1)
Beeple what? (Score:2)
The article has several links that on first glance might lead to more explanation but no, they all link right back to itself. So, WTF is Beeple, anyway and what kind of art, exactly? The useless article has no details.
Re: (Score:1)
There's plenty of Beeple content but (Score:2)
for some mysterious reason that shit was posted instead.
Image search "Beeple" and there will be many useful links while you'll instantly get an idea of his trendy style.
His political work is often amusing but he lacks range, understandable given the medium. He doesn't take himself too seriously and seems a fun fellow.
So ... (Score:2)
... anyone has a torrent link for that ?
Would make a nice non-repeating slideshow screensaver.
Re: (Score:1)
Some people have too much money (Score:2)
I never heard of this "Beeple" person before this article. So with a few searches I was able to get a good sample of his work.
On the whole, pretty good. But utterly nothing remarkable. You can find literally thousands of better works of digital art by talented artists at sites like deviantart and patreon. On Netflix I see far far better digital art. I really don't see how this digital collection can actually be worth any substantial amount of money. In short the Emperor ain't got no clothes.
Wha
Re: (Score:2)
Blockchain, actually. The latest scam is called Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) and it basically is a signed representation of the item in question. You produce exactly one and it goes into your wallet. You can sell that token and the rights to the work contained within for whatever you want, and the NFT tra
Re: (Score:1)
SCOOP: @IBM has cut its blockchain team down to almost nothing, according to four people familiar with the situation. https://twitter.com/coindesk/s... [twitter.com]
Bitcoin is legit, and the decentralization begins and ends with Bitcoin!
It's not the collection, it's the people involved (Score:1)
Having been in the art market for a while from the selling art perspective (I'm an artist, btw), I can tell you that the worth of art is a matter of the social class of those who buy it, not an objective, on-the-books, value. What this guy did was to buy $60M of social status among upper crust elites, and he got a bunch of digital files he'll probably see only once, if at all.
To continue further, what I've come to realize is that there's no such thing as an objective dollar value of a piece of art. Ins