World's most expensive photo

[Maritimer1]

I wonder if it's been Photoshopped!

Wow. I had to read some of the comments under the photo. One fellow said industrial buildings had been removed. Big whoop. It's boring. I may be culturally inept, but it's boring.

[Myk]

Aesthetics of the photo aside, Gursky was a fairly early adopter of digital photo manipulation. By today's standards the manipulation he did may seem mundane, but remember this was created in 1999. What type of computers were we using in 1999? Look at the size of the print and assume he printed at 300 dpi that is 21900 x 42900 or 939 mp; or 100dpi for 7300x14300 and 104mp. Even if it was interpolated that is a lot of processing power for 1999.
So from that stand point the photo is historical in the use of digital technology on such a large scale image, coupled with the popularity of the photographer, and the limited nature of the print; six were printed, this was the first and largest of them. Four of the remaining prints are in museums around the world. Throw in a bunch of wealthy art lovers in an auction environment with the inherent competition of such settings and it seems like the perfect storm of art sales.

[Melkus]

Justing wonding when I will get lucky and sell one of my photos for a cool mil or so

[Markvetnz]

I saw this image last week when I received our local photo club's newsletter. Suddenly I'm feeling rich. I toss out a hundred photos like that every time I come back from a shoot. Bugger, I should have kept them all!

My first reaction was WTF. A fool and his money are parted every day. However, having said that, there will be another fool willing to pay even more for it now.

[jwrobbo]

Nobody there!!

[GrahamH]

Another take on this event is that it increases the profile of photography as a collectible art form. Perhaps this will draw the attention of others who have lots of money to 'invest' in art. So there could be a knock-on effect further down the line.
If that IS the case, then photographic artists with tastes more similar to this forums members may be in a position to make more money and hence create more.
That would be a good thing. Only hope I am alive to see that happen.

Graham
(trying to find anything positive about this picture).

[Skyline]

I wonder if it's been Photoshopped!

There was a drive through Mcdonalds in the original



Someone probably started a rumour about how good the picture was around the mega rich.... and insane. One thing leads to another and before you know it all the rich people want it because they don't know what to spend their billions on.

It will be worth twice as much in 5 years once lady gaga has had it edited lol

[Milzarr]

I just saw this on a Chinese forum today!
Somehow it shows the relationship between nature and human........I don't get it.

[Eigil Skovgaard]

As this thread is about the absurd gab between the quality of Andreas Gursky’s image “Rhein II” and the price $4.34 million - leading to a lot of wondering, I thought that the obvious explanation would be appreciated.

Unfortunately my post about what is going on in real life immediately disappeared from this thread.

I respect the preferences here, but if you are interested in reading my explanation, just mail me on eigil.skovgaard(replace-with-at-sign)gmail.com and request the missing post from “World's most expensive photo”.

[escoville]

This is an old thread, I know. But a Gursky retrospective is currently being held in Düsseldorf, and it's so popular that it's been extended by two weeks. I've seen it twice, and it was pretty full both times. What has to be said is that these pictures are vast, and that's what makes the difference. They are also very sharp. Seeing them like this is quite different from seeing them on a computer screen. Just to make the point, an ordinary poster-size (about 80 cm x 30 cm) version of Rhein II is on display. You wouldn't look at it twice. I think that's a joke on the part of the organizers. The pictures are stunning, and size does matter.

[pnodrog]

Perhaps we need to get a cleaner to deal with it? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3604278.stm

I like it but it is not a photograph I would spend any money on unless it had a very good frame.

[Colin Southern]

Perhaps we need to get a cleaner to deal with it? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3604278.stm

I like it but it is not a photograph I would spend any money on unless it had a very good frame.

Moral of the story is that cleaners are smarter than the artist or gallery bosses!

[xpatUSA]

The purchase pretty much sums up everything that is wrong with the world, the economy is shot to s**t, people are dying of starvation yet someone can go spend that sort of money on a photo

Its so very very wrong

Along with CEO's income, football stars, Hollywood.

As Citizen Smith was fond of saying "up against the wall" or something like that . . .

[escoville]

Okay, 4 million dollars is absurd. But a photo exhibition that gets more than 1,500 visitors a day for three months... that's also quite something. So the guy doesn't just appeal to people with more money than sense.

[Splatsworth]

Okay, 4 million dollars is absurd. But a photo exhibition that gets more than 1,500 visitors a day for three months... that's also quite something. So the guy doesn't just appeal to people with more money than sense.

I was refering to one particular picture, not the artist or the exhibition

[escoville]

I wasn't referring to your post, Splatsworth. But Rhein II a metre across is a very ordinary photograph indeed. Five metres across it probably looks quite different. It's the difference between seeing Skyfall on a big movie screen or on a tablet. Gursky himself is quite open about it. When asked why he made such large pictures, he said 'Big pictures, big money.' However, you have to know what pics look best when they're very big.

[Splatsworth]

I wasn't referring to your post, Splatsworth. But Rhein II a metre across is a very ordinary photograph indeed. Five metres across it probably looks quite different. It's the difference between seeing Skyfall on a big movie screen or on a tablet. Gursky himself is quite open about it. When asked why he made such large pictures, he said 'Big pictures, big money.' However, you have to know what pics look best when they're very big.

Fair enough, but its still not worth the money

[AB26]

Perhaps we need to get a cleaner to deal with it? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3604278.stm

This gave me a good laugh. Guess they were only doing their jobs. Those cleaners should be promoted to Gallery Supervisors.

[HDphotography]

Stupid is as stupid does.
I guess there are people in this world with money to burn. Could have used that money for some more worthy humanitarian aid.