Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 11:06:11 GMT
With B if you look at the art hotel for example, he's still very much making his point and doing his thing, the placement considering who largely runs the art world, the fact gagosian and co are busting to get him on their books to control, it's a straight up 2 fingers largely overlooked
|
|
|
|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Aug 5, 2017 11:08:07 GMT
Its just not that blk and white(excuse the pun), circumstances change, responsibilities change, people have to make a living it's unavoidable, they can work a job they hate all their lives and just do graff or use the thing they love to make a living. Nature of the best, prob a dilemma balance for a lot of artists wanting to keep true to themselves. There's also a limit to how effective the message can be when localised compared to larger audience using other mediums. I definitely agree it's not black and white but in most cases, the artists aren't the ones benefiting directly - it's the auction houses, "investors" etc. if a $100 print turns into a $10,000 print, the artist isn't getting that money. If they're lucky they can piggyback off of the noteriety but most artists can't and will continue to struggle. As they say "the rich get richer, the rest get the picture" |
|
|
|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Aug 5, 2017 11:15:42 GMT
plus there's the fact POW have never stopped selling B prints that supposedly sold out upon release (and still are to this day) just goes to show that they artificially created an imbalance to the supply and demand since the beginning, inflating prices and driving up the demand and noteriety. Yes, it's a good business model but since when was graff about business?
|
|
|
|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Aug 5, 2017 11:19:17 GMT
With B if you look at the art hotel for example, he's still very much making his point and doing his thing, the placement considering who largely runs the art world, the fact gagosian and co are busting to get him on their books to control, it's a straight up 2 fingers largely overlooked Don't get me wrong - I still love Banksy - i just don't love the trail of greed that's followed in his wake or the fact that you can only buy one if you're rich Take Toof as a counterpoint - been painting just as long as B, has a huge fan base, and is able to make a living selling affordable art to his fans on a regular basis |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 11:25:03 GMT
Its just not that blk and white(excuse the pun), circumstances change, responsibilities change, people have to make a living it's unavoidable, they can work a job they hate all their lives and just do graff or use the thing they love to make a living. Nature of the best, prob a dilemma balance for a lot of artists wanting to keep true to themselves. There's also a limit to how effective the message can be when localised compared to larger audience using other mediums. I definitely agree it's not black and white but in most cases, the artists aren't the ones benefiting directly - it's the auction houses, "investors" etc. if a $100 print turns into a $10,000 print, the artist isn't getting that money. If they're lucky they can piggyback off of the noteriety but most artists can't and will continue to struggle. As they say "the rich get richer, the rest get the picture" The artists do benefit though, if a piece that was originally sold for £100 gets sold for more it creates a new bar/market value for the artists work and increases that artists overall value of future works. If the piece at £100 was later sold for £100 then that's where prices stay. Depends on what the individual wants, if they want to sell for £100 and happy with that that's fine too. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 11:29:24 GMT
With B if you look at the art hotel for example, he's still very much making his point and doing his thing, the placement considering who largely runs the art world, the fact gagosian and co are busting to get him on their books to control, it's a straight up 2 fingers largely overlooked Don't get me wrong - I still love Banksy - i just don't love the trail of greed that's followed in his wake or the fact that you can only buy one if you're rich Take Toof as a counterpoint - been painting just as long as B, has a huge fan base, and is able to make a living selling affordable art to his fans on a regular basis Nature of the beast unfortunately. People can still hang his images to enjoy, the sig/coa only gives it value. I could be wrong but if sweettoof was offered 100k for one of his artworks he'd prob take it |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 11:36:48 GMT
plus there's the fact POW have never stopped selling B prints that supposedly sold out upon release (and still are to this day) just goes to show that they artificially created an imbalance to the supply and demand since the beginning, inflating prices and driving up the demand and noteriety. Yes, it's a good business model but since when was graff about business? The prints/paintings are nothing to do with Graff, they're bread and butter |
|
|
|
Post by thugs on Aug 5, 2017 13:30:11 GMT
I definitely agree it's not black and white but in most cases, the artists aren't the ones benefiting directly - it's the auction houses, "investors" etc. if a $100 print turns into a $10,000 print, the artist isn't getting that money. i take it you're unaware of 'artist's resale rights'? the artist’s resale right (arr) was introduced a decade ago. thanks to this right, over the last decade the 'design and artists copyright society' (dacs) has distributed nearly £50m to more than 3,900 artists and artists’ estates. arr provides a royalty for artists and artists’ estates whenever their work is resold by an auctioneer, dealer or gallery for €1,000 or more. so if you sell an artwork when you’re first starting out, and it becomes more collectable as your career progresses, arr ensures you get a share of the profit made on your works if they are resold. arr lasts for as long as copyright, which is your lifetime plus 70 years, so you can leave the right to your descendants in your will. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 13:34:08 GMT
I definitely agree it's not black and white but in most cases, the artists aren't the ones benefiting directly - it's the auction houses, "investors" etc. if a $100 print turns into a $10,000 print, the artist isn't getting that money. i take it you're unaware of 'artist's resale rights'? the artist’s resale right (arr) was introduced a decade ago. thanks to this right, over the last decade the 'design and artists copyright society' (dacs) has distributed nearly £50m to more than 3,900 artists and artists’ estates. arr provides a royalty for artists and artists’ estates whenever their work is resold by an auctioneer, dealer or gallery for €1,000 or more. so if you sell an artwork when you’re first starting out, and it becomes more collectable as your career progresses, arr ensures you get a share of the profit made on your works if they are resold. arr lasts for as long as copyright, which is your lifetime plus 70 years, so you can leave the right to your descendants in your will. A work an artist I dealt with sold in auction in 2010, he received more in ARR than when he originally sold it, he was pleased more than anything. |
|
|
|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Aug 5, 2017 14:46:50 GMT
I definitely agree it's not black and white but in most cases, the artists aren't the ones benefiting directly - it's the auction houses, "investors" etc. if a $100 print turns into a $10,000 print, the artist isn't getting that money. i take it you're unaware of 'artist's resale rights'? the artist’s resale right (arr) was introduced a decade ago. thanks to this right, over the last decade the 'design and artists copyright society' (dacs) has distributed nearly £50m to more than 3,900 artists and artists’ estates. arr provides a royalty for artists and artists’ estates whenever their work is resold by an auctioneer, dealer or gallery for €1,000 or more. so if you sell an artwork when you’re first starting out, and it becomes more collectable as your career progresses, arr ensures you get a share of the profit made on your works if they are resold. arr lasts for as long as copyright, which is your lifetime plus 70 years, so you can leave the right to your descendants in your will. we don't have that over here unfortuantely |
|
|
|
Post by thugs on Aug 5, 2017 15:21:46 GMT
i take it you're unaware of 'artist's resale rights'? the artist’s resale right (arr) was introduced a decade ago. thanks to this right, over the last decade the 'design and artists copyright society' (dacs) has distributed nearly £50m to more than 3,900 artists and artists’ estates. arr provides a royalty for artists and artists’ estates whenever their work is resold by an auctioneer, dealer or gallery for €1,000 or more. so if you sell an artwork when you’re first starting out, and it becomes more collectable as your career progresses, arr ensures you get a share of the profit made on your works if they are resold. arr lasts for as long as copyright, which is your lifetime plus 70 years, so you can leave the right to your descendants in your will. we don't have that over here unfortuantely you do in california. |
|
|
|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Aug 5, 2017 17:15:01 GMT
Don't get me wrong - I still love Banksy - i just don't love the trail of greed that's followed in his wake or the fact that you can only buy one if you're rich Take Toof as a counterpoint - been painting just as long as B, has a huge fan base, and is able to make a living selling affordable art to his fans on a regular basis Nature of the beast unfortunately. People can still hang his images to enjoy, the sig/coa only gives it value. I could be wrong but if sweettoof was offered 100k for one of his artworks he'd prob take it I'm sure he would but that's just one example of a graff artist being able to make a living of their work while keeping it affordable to his fans - the same fans that helped make him as popular as he is today |
|
|
|
Post by sɐǝpı ɟo uoıʇɐɹǝpǝɟ on Aug 5, 2017 17:17:12 GMT
we don't have that over here unfortuantely you do in california. really? never knew that. Does it only apply if the artwork is bought and sold in the state, or does it apply to sales everywhere? It would be great if the whole country adopted that into law but I don't think they ever would sadly |
|
|
|
Post by Still Hate Thatcher on Aug 5, 2017 17:22:43 GMT
i take it you're unaware of 'artist's resale rights'? the artist’s resale right (arr) was introduced a decade ago. thanks to this right, over the last decade the 'design and artists copyright society' (dacs) has distributed nearly £50m to more than 3,900 artists and artists’ estates. arr provides a royalty for artists and artists’ estates whenever their work is resold by an auctioneer, dealer or gallery for €1,000 or more. so if you sell an artwork when you’re first starting out, and it becomes more collectable as your career progresses, arr ensures you get a share of the profit made on your works if they are resold. arr lasts for as long as copyright, which is your lifetime plus 70 years, so you can leave the right to your descendants in your will. A work an artist I dealt with sold in auction in 2010, he received more in ARR than when he originally sold it, he was pleased more than anything. He must have very low expectations.... Royalty Resale price 4% up to €50,000 3% between €50,000.01 and €200,000 1% between €200,000.01 and €350,000 0.5% between €350,000.01 and €500,000 0.25% in excess of €500,000 This scale is also cumulative in much the same way as income tax is calculated. For example, the royalty payable for an art work sold for €200,000 would amount to €6,500. This is made up of: 1st tier 0 to €50,000 will attract a royalty of 4% ie €2,000 2nd tier €50,001 to €200,000 will attract a royalty of 3% ie €4,500 Royalties are also capped so that the total amount of the royalty paid for any single sale of a work cannot exceed €12,500. ARR is exempt of VAT. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 17:46:50 GMT
A work an artist I dealt with sold in auction in 2010, he received more in ARR than when he originally sold it, he was pleased more than anything. He must have very low expectations.... Royalty Resale price 4% up to €50,000 3% between €50,000.01 and €200,000 1% between €200,000.01 and €350,000 0.5% between €350,000.01 and €500,000 0.25% in excess of €500,000 This scale is also cumulative in much the same way as income tax is calculated. For example, the royalty payable for an art work sold for €200,000 would amount to €6,500. This is made up of: 1st tier 0 to €50,000 will attract a royalty of 4% ie €2,000 2nd tier €50,001 to €200,000 will attract a royalty of 3% ie €4,500 Royalties are also capped so that the total amount of the royalty paid for any single sale of a work cannot exceed €12,500. ARR is exempt of VAT. More money for nothing in his eyes, the original sale was 2500 of which he got 1500 in the early 90s, he got nearly 3000 arr for it selling for 75000 20 yrs later, everything that's sold now from his 50 yr career he gets a cut of, multiple times on the same piece if resold over. |
|
|
|
Post by Still Hate Thatcher on Aug 5, 2017 18:02:31 GMT
3k on 75k? Hardly a living...
Anyway, fuck off. You're a parasite. You're opinion is self serving bullshit. Come and chat when you've launched an artists career, you teat suckling fucker.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 18:15:03 GMT
3k on 75k? Hardly a living... He doesn't make his living on ARR it's free money he never got before, an added pension. Also something for his family once he's gone. If he sold a new painting he'd get the lions share. But hey i know how much you like to come across like you know something. You know fk all. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 18:39:40 GMT
3k on 75k? Hardly a living... Anyway, fuck off. You're a parasite. You're opinion is self serving bullshit. Come and chat when you've launched an artists career, you teat suckling fucker. Tiresome. I've been dealing with artists since 2002 and involved in helping many of their careers, like I said you know nothing. I don't need to prove myself, you obviously feel like you do. |
|
