Adam Ruins Everything - How the Fine Art Market is a Scam | truTV

[@sarahholman2570]

You're talking crap Adam! That all-white painting I bought for $3,000,000 was worth every penny!

[@jodroboxes]

I've got a couple of them at home, i'll sell 'em for half that price.

[@ACDBunnie]

Uh, it represents purity and is a call for humans to not expect anything out of the world. There's a dichotomy because it makes you loose all preconceptions you unknowingly have, yet it's second meaning forces you to have such a belief - that being the symbolism in the color white. These to meanings are used to reveal the artist's true message: chaos. The single color of the canvas makes it look on its own simple, but with these two manmade views clashing it creates the very opposite. This reflects a past theme in their other works which is that the world is naturally simple, but man makes it complicated. 😆 (I'm joking. I don't know about anyone else, but I find it very easy to create a deep meaning out of those kinds of pictures)

[@sirrathersplendid4825]

Attie Davis, can I borrow your text? I have a piece of dirty toilet paper I want to hawk to a gallery... It will multiply the value of my ‘art’ at least tenfold. (LOL)

[@fwg11]

@@sirrathersplendid4825 You guys are so hilarious!

[@fwg11]

@@ACDBunnie Ahhhh . . . . I seeeeee . . . thank you for enlightening me :) hahahaha

[@birdocalypse7111]

Fun fact, Daniel Radcliffe actually was able to buy the painting after the artist found out he wanted to buy it as he was a huge Harry Potter fan.

[@richardsavings6690]

Any idea what the gallery owner had to say about it, or was he cut out?

[@ManekiNeko1972]

Adam Conover tends to leave off any details that might disprove his point. For example" Linus Pauling was 92 years old when he died. Asian students were considered model minorities but in their home countries, their educational standards are extremely high. Gun control won't work in the United States since most gun deaths are suicides and of the ones used for homicide, ~80% are in fact from gangs.

[@BeaverChainsaw]

@@ManekiNeko1972 true but it still proves Adam's point on how exclusionary art world is. If it wasn't for the artist, Daniel Radcliffe would've never gotten the painting

[@edpascoe]

@@BeaverChainsaw The gallery is now known as super elite and he still got his commission. Daniel got major PR and since the entire world now knows Harry Potter likes that artist everything else that gallery has by the same artist is now worth more. Almost like it was all planned out that way from the start. On what planet is a major Hollywood star not prestigious enough to sell to?

[@jakejanuzelli1874]

@@ManekiNeko1972 just because Linus Pauling lived a long life doesn’t mean his claims about vitamins were reasonable. That’s not how science works.

[@kittygrimm7301]

Here's the *really* scummy thing about this: if you're an artist and you're planning on selling or commissioning your artwork, you have to rate your prices by the size of the piece and the materials used to make it. Since the materials used to make it are not cheap, naturally, nor are the results. HOWEVER, more often than not, the resulting price is nowhere *near* as expensive as what you'd see in a gallery. This is just another way the fine art world is cheating you out of your money. You'd get a better deal by simply supporting local artists.

[@unrealenginedeveloper3397]

He only shows conspiracy theories wearing a tinfoil hat.

[@African.empress]

@@unrealenginedeveloper3397 you seem like a person suffering from cognitive dissonance

[@planetkc]

True. I've had friends selling their art cheap.

[@unrealenginedeveloper3397]

@@African.empress this is what a typical person in a tinfoil hat would say

[@tdogharty]

The size thing is a pretty crappy measurement. In that case the bigger you get the crappier you get.. Think being in the right place at the right time is key. That seems to be tough tho..

[@TheWhitePhoenix2]

Most of us who graduate from a fine art school realize this. Students are selected by professors who succeed while others are left to flounder in obscurity.

[@crlstru1]

"By professors who succeed", what does that mean? succeed at what?

[@bmona7550]

@@crlstru1 Being an entrepreneur meaning business minded because that is what art is nowadays...An artist can literally sell a white canvas because they are "charming enough" or with a "sob story" of some kind when they talk about what inspired it

[@kellykizer6718]

@@crlstru1 it means you spent enough time on the casting couch.

[@apexone5502]

@@rustinstardust2094 funny you say that because while I was watching the video, I was wondering which part of the art gallery game consisted of dudes willing to take it in the rear just to get their works supported.

[@rustinstardust2094]

@@apexone5502 Dudes, women...many take it in some way or another for fame.

[@c.m.2732]

Yeah, as an artist myself, I can say this much: It's an open secret. Everyone who's studied art knows that your actual skill is largely irrelevant, but your ability to market yourself and network your way into the fine art world. None of my professors in the art program pretended it wasn't a crooked system, only that there are niches you can worm your way into besides being a high art artist (like working at the museum, running a small studio, illustration work, etc.).

[@mikesamovarov4054]

Art is highly luxurious product, vast majority of artists have zero chance (yes, even if they're fantastic). Selling any fine art in the overflooded market is almost impossible, because of extremely LOW demand and MASSIVE number of offers. Plus, most "artists" aren't even artists, but rather art students, teachers, online learners and crafters. It's rare to see a combination of high skills in fine arts, amazing seles/marketing knowledge and experience, communication and networking skills at very high level, but also outstanding charisma and unique vision. Historic relevance helps too. So.... most "artists" will remain hobbyists, sadly.

[@godspeed6991]

My high school art teacher was amazingly talented. One of her pieces was a lampstand in an evening snowstorm. It sounds basic, but the snow and the light looked so realistic that the final product looked like a photograph. I used a tutorial to create an oil pastel painting of water droplets on a blade of grass. This was my first artistic endeavor. I sent a pic to my sister in law who mistook the oil pastel for a photograph. Creating art that looks hyper- realistic isn't sought after, and I have no idea why (other than abstract garbage is a potential scam?).

[@annasolovyeva1013]

So, was the Soviet approach correct? If short, art in the SU would be divided into depictionary art and decorative art. Decorative art is decorating useful objects (e.g. design, architecture, painting porcelain, making wallpaper and textile prints, etc.). Depictionary art is painting and sculptures, etc. depicting objects and ideas. Illustration, theatre/movie art and architecture (allthough with civil engineering being put above architecture) lay in between with their clear function. So, depictionary art had to be produced by an artist with education (education was free), clearly depict objects and ideas that would have to stick to a certain moral code. And the government would allow to sell such art and even order it in quite big amounts. And decorative art had to just look nice, those people are basically employed as designers, their designs (abstract stuff is just treated as a print/ornament here) are their products, and the abstract sketches and clay and cardboard sculptures are just "artistic studies". Look up Deineka as an artist and Leningrad Porcelain abstract designs as the result of this policy. The world seems to forget that DESIGN is where abstract art looks great. Malevich for instance, worked as a designer, and his black square was originally a piece of a theatre background hanged up the way an icon normally would be in Russia to make a hype on scandalous atheism and nihilism.

[@JSchroederee]

Open secret seems generous. I thought all this wall just general knowledge. I have no art education but this is all known or super obvious

[@takeongeek2027]

This is a good reason to support indie artists and buy directly from them. It makes me sad so many excellent artists won't get the prestige they deserve, but at least we can support their work and let them know it is appreciated.

[@alibrennan5977]

You say that but will you really?

[@TomHendricksMusea]

Support smart. Sadly buying 100 paintings won't help. Here's ideas I've gathered over 3 decades Most modern art substitutes weird for quality, narrow isms for scope, and trendy for depth. It also refuses to change or even talk about progressive ideas in art like those that follow Too many treat art as a marketing scheme. Modern art has become a trendy clique and the art now is mostly over promoted footnotes to greater art that was done 100 years ago. But art is too important to be reduced to a trendy clique. Post-ism, is art for a new century, not a continuation of last century trends. 1 Mass Market Paintings like Prints. When any art form is mass marketed it enters a golden age. This has happened with books, records, and film. Let's add paintings. Most art is in storage in museum basements. Mass Marketing allows art to tour in copies and allows artists to make royalties on copies. Why do you think the world gets so excited about a new great book, record, or film; but no one cares about a new great painting? All are mass produced except the painting. 2. End a Century of Isms. Dump the genres and formulas and let all kinds of art be a part of the art world. 3. Shift Emphasis From Trendy to Quality. Shift emphasis from the latest trendy art, to quality art in any style. Just because art is weird does not mean it is great art. 4. Free the Art From Museums and Galleries. Get the art out of the ivory elitist museum and gallery towers and back into the world. Have city art centers open to all artists. Make art that is relevant and communicates with people. Start with the first generation of artists online. 5. Postism is Part of a Bigger Revolution. Postism is part of the bigger art and media revolution out of Dallas, that includes art, music, lit, film, media, and a lot more. 6. Postism online: Online artists are the new wave of art. We had all the isms of last century. Now we have a free for all, of all kinds of artists, that are not sanctioned by any museum or gallery, displaying their work. Out of that comes the next wave and revolution of artists. Last century the goal was to fit the ism. This century the goal is to do great art - no ism, no boundaries. Fractionalized art then, synchronized art now. Even calling something modern art is a type of ism that separates that art from the art of the past. The 20th century was a century of experimentation in art. Now in the 21st we can choose from all those styles and / or start one of our own. Then too if someone devises a way to charge and collect a penny per view on a webpage, that would allow any great artist to get money for their art and have a career without any middlemen. Duchamp broke ground 100 years ago - but now his clones are just shoveling dirt. Weird art is easy, you put a strip of raw bacon across an expensive violin, but it's not good art. Join the art revolution and pull the art world out of last century. Musea since 1992.

[@justanoman6497]

​@@alibrennan5977 I dunno about him, but I already have. Now, I'm a weeb, so most (but not all) are anime related. I've spent on art prints, cover song cds, key chains etc. I've also donated to two abridged series that I enjoy as well as custom map/mods for some games. I can't say I've paid for everything I enjoyed because that's damn hard in this day and age. But I do make an effort as I'm fortunate enough to be able to afford them.

[@Narutofan825]

No idiot. Stop buying pixels online or paper that can burn in a second and gives you no warmth.

[@JamesFryerCreative]

Having been in the art business for many years, I can confirm this. There is great art out there, but you aren't likely to see it at the posh galleries. Many cities have artists' studio collectives where many artist have studios in one building, this is your best bet for seeing anything good.

[@howl8406]

Artist myself; ive seen art being sold in artwalks on the streets that are beautiful and amazing but they are seen as dirty and not "real art" because some rich guy didnt buy it and hang it in a museum. The sad truth also is these artists underprice the work they do to get paid because people dont believe art is worth anything even though so much of the stuff we have today was designed and created by artists. The art world is both needed in the world but so hard to work in.

[@dinopawnz]

Its the same for music too people...you think cardi b is like the best singer in the world or something? these are handpicked people who are put in the spotlight and made famous. there are better singers living on the same street corner as you who will never be as famous

[@bradykirk9932]

Can confirm. I work near one such building. So much great art at such great prices. Every medium you can name is used in there. So inspiring.

[@BurningAzure]

I have a Rick and Morty painting in my room that I got at a farmers market for under $100

[@koulfurno7271]

"Paintings are just trading cards for rich people."

[@halcyon_echo42]

Yep. That ultra rare Charizard is pretty pricey too though

[@mshaqed2538]

If trading cards were a way to launder your black market money and money earned by illegal means...

[@gerulata7722]

@@mshaqed2538 They can be if you're creative enough

[@PipeGuy64Bit]

@@mshaqed2538 Actually it has considering how card speculating blew up last year along with the new/used game market.

[@mattwo7]

Also NFTs.

[@roxyspamcake]

Hmm... Bansky suddenly makes a whole lot of sense, trying to be anonymous and un-marketable by painting on walls, yet still having people cut his work out and sell it for millions. That's gotta be frustrating.

[@wildmarjoramdieselpunk6396]

That is why he put a device that would shread a painting once it was sold at auction inside of its frame.

[@qdfxrg]

Somehow stops shredding halfway, clip goes viral and creates another piece of art which is known by millions. That piece is now much more rare and sought after than any other of the same stencil pieces, therefore increasing its value. Banksy is probably some rich dudes trying to make more money

[@DQABlack]

Banksy showed a video of a test run that he did that did rip the painting entirely. This painting was sitting in storage for a long time, the battery or another mechanism may have worn out so it didn't go all of the way.

[@nobodycares2820]

He literally sold it later for double the value, so... He gotta get that cash

[@user-gh8wt2zi2n]

From what I've heard, he's actully a famous artist who secretly is Bansky. He has a known identity and his secret idenity

[@someoneonly]

"Please sir I just want one painting thar doesnt talk to me, why are you doing this to me" 😂

[@dragonballiscool1653]

Mister potter, they talk to you for a reason. Go back to hogwarts, ur missing ur classes.

[@warrynfullagar745]

Darkness Rising Harry: No. That place is constantly trying to kill me.

[@dragonballiscool1653]

@@warrynfullagar745 HARRY, STOP COMPLAINING

[@pingabl3]

even if they try to kill you we dont care so GET TO CLASS!!!!!!!!

[@TheJampt]

Ahahahahha.

[@chakatfirepaw]

Canada has partly blocked the "buy and donate art" tax dodge: The value given by the appraiser hired by the owner isn't what matters. It's the valuation by the Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board that the Canada Revenue Agency uses, and even then the art has to be deemed 'significant' by the CCPERB for there to be any tax credit. A recent donation to run afoul of this is a collection of ~2000 Annie Leibovitz photographic prints donated to the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia: The donating family bought them for $4.75M, (half up front, half contingent on the tax credits paying out), had them appraised for $20M and donated them. The ruling: Only 762 of the prints were culturally significant, (the rest were just additional copies of published work), and they were only worth $1.6M.

[@janbaer3241]

The prints were bid up to the $1.6 million value by people wanting their own collections to gain value. Look on DeviantArt and you'll find 100 others who do just as good, or even superior work.

[@otakusnorex3724]

@@janbaer3241 Canada is better then the us

[@lohancindy5442]

Yeah well that’s like your opinion man

[@ichijofestival2576]

Yes, but on the flipside, you have considerably less gun violence than us and nearly no chance of going bankrupt from medical bills. So... take that?

[@legotech101]

Canada does everything better

[@avinashkatiki1505]

The title "Adam ruins everything" is wrong, it should be "Adam enlightens everyone".

[@LeginNoslen]

Or "Adam Makes The Room He Is In Smell Like Aquanet"

[@codydemaria2027]

I’m not going to lie , when I first saw this show’s trailer, I thought it was nonsense. But now seeing him expose the art world fraud , I’m very interested.

[@Mystic_Stirling]

The naked truth can drive some people insane...

[@SetuwoKecik]

Because truth ruins the fun

[@khalyleedwards7735]

If you tell me everything wrong about something I enjoy, yes you enlightened me but you definitely ruined the joy I had when I was clueless

[@ryanclemons1]

So selling on deviantart is closer to a real art buying and selling then real life.....HA now that is funny.

[@paulinapayment9760]

Yes- but it's because people are buying art for art/characters, not exposure, unlike (most, seeing as some galleries are mom and pop shops or community-related in smaller areas) fine art galleries. Though that can be a lie when taking copied art styles (more or less around the "amateur artist circles", I mean that lightly and from someone with a fine arts degree) and minuscule art communities under the magnifying glass just as we do to fine art galleries. Life mimics life. But yes, in general, it's closer to a true objective arts market rather than subjective money grubbing- but art in itself is subjective, as that's the point. Unfortunately, sleaze balls and snake-oil sales men have been around since entrepreneurial opportunities have been. What needs to change is how people are educated in art in general and in fine art schools/institutions.

[@thesenceofmorality]

I was just thinking the same thing. On a side note this is actually a really good thing. If I get rich I can just decorate my mansion with stuff from Deviant art

[@skylx0812]

...you mean zdeviantZART (now with more green Z's)

[@Malik_Hoff]

Than* :p

[@berliandro]

Than*

[@dracolithfiend3121]

Oh and BTW anyone who donates when a store (Walmart, McDonalds etc) asks for you too should know that you are paying their taxes for them.

[@adonismuminovic8941]

Draco Lithfiend link or explain?

[@dracolithfiend3121]

Generally speaking charitable donations made at the register of a walmart, tacobell, mcdonalds or other store is then collected by the charities who add it up and attribute the donation to the store that had the collection. That store then writes it off on their taxes. They also use it in advertising to claim that "They" donated "$$$" amount of money. This is illegal in Canada but perfectly legal in the US. Some companies do not do this such as Publix however many (including Walmart) do. Thus when you give a dollar to fight hunger at a retailer you might actually be doing little more then increasing profit margins. It's widely know yet rarely talked about and in the years I spent working for walmart I can assure you it happens.

[@adonismuminovic8941]

Draco Lithfiend wow that’s crazy. Makes me not feel bad about not donating through them now

[@bowchickabowwowthatswhatmy3219]

who donates to mcdonalds?

[@potmki6601]

I need Adam Ruins Everything episode about it

[@lilygoose]

Museum person here: the IRS has standards for qualified appraisal that correspond with the value of the artwork. (I.e. the more it's worth, the more art history clout the person has to have who is determining how much it's worth) so typically, if it's a valuable painting, and thus a valuable tax write off, the museum themselves or a qualified, unaffiliated expert is usually determining the price. source: IRS publication 561

[@basilmemories]

huh! do you have a good start for where I can find a little more meat on the whole process? Google is indeed my friend, but most of what I've found just scratches the surface of the museum world and all the moving parts.

[@mycontentcreation5264]

@@basilmemories www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p561.pdf

[@laurenvelentzas5044]

While “fine” art is a total scam, don’t let this discount art *movements* as scams. Basically every art movement at least partially resulted from a desire by artists once considered the outgroup to question the upper class art world and prove this exact thing: that there is no one definition of what makes good art. And when those movements started to become profitable rich assholes swooped in and claimed them so they could have the money. Suddenly the style meant to push back against the establishment become a part of it. TLDR: good art is what you think looks pretty, whether that be a Renaissance portrait or ketchup on a canvas

[@DoctorHouse999]

I love the last sentence

[@mycontentcreation5264]

No there are different styles one might like while another doesn’t but those take knowledge of the craft with important decisions that try’s to grab people’s attention. Modern art and ai art are not art they have no real talent, but at least with modern art someone actually uses a pencil or a brush. While ai art you type in words and website uses existing images to create something, while you sit down and do nothing.

[@ladyofthemoonflower]

And this was why I even though I received my degree in art history, I found the art world disgusting and refused to continue.

[@segmentsAndCurves]

You know there's the internet, right. There are definitely people out there who would like to see your creation. It's not the art fault, is the market! That said, don't let me dictate what you're gonna do.

[@--------8453]

“Artist” derived from the region (mainly The U.K.) of western-most Europe at a time when “Crafsmen” (& their buyers) had had enough of creating works which werent functional ((like furniture or transportation apparatuses {{furniture was recognised as a Craftsman's work back in those ages}} for example)) A new identification was dubbed: “Artists”; to distinguish between the type of worx being made to sell. The 1st Artist institution(school/academy) was founded in or geographically near The U.K. 1 of the Nations that would MUCH LATER colonize Africa, so as long as Rebecka isn't (considered) "Black" (Artist) then she shouldn't have any hindering problems appealing to the Eurocentric -buyers overwhelming the Buyers Market.

[@mikesamovarov4054]

Couldn't fit in? Don't blame fine art industry specifics for your failures to adapt.

[@JacobHollis96]

Knowing the truth about these so called "fine artists" makes me feel better about my art.

[@JacobHollis96]

@@Tom-pe3zf Thank you!

[@vibing6530]

Same

[@JacobHollis96]

@@vibing6530 I done many paintings back when I was a senior in high school (about 5yrs ago). I got a lot of good criticism from my art class.

[@SilverSpoon_]

I don't know what you draw but if it's ponies, it's immediately much more worth than all of Marcel Duchamp's works.

[@durfdurffigan8680]

Silver Spoon the man was the first shitposter, and if you don’t respect that then get out.

[@SomeGuy-ty7kr]

I feel a little guilty because I only watched this because I already hate the "fine" "art" world. Probably should not indulge my prejudices.

[@tanyapatriciahenauer4176]

Luke Hart so you are a real artist too?! ;-) - hey I sold two paintings back in the ‘90ies - wanna buy one so I can beat Van Gough’s life-time achievement?!!

[@TheRavenousWolfe_27]

Indulge away

[@UnbreakableRukawa]

Fine art and money laundering has been a pair for centuries, it is also another market that is easily manipulable by a select few that while many brokers enter this market during the tech boom. At this point, the wealthy don't even try to hide it, they literally have art pieces priced at millions with a dash of paint to laugh at people who defend this as "art" because of the price tag.

[@a.westenholz4032]

As a kid I had an art teacher who loved contemporary art. My parents though, being historians, were more into old masters and the like. I remember when my teacher took us the museum to look at these great pieces of "art" how unimpressed I was. While some did have a novel or interesting concept behind them, they were still utterly boring or ugly as a picture, and hardly took much ability to paint. Sculpture was worse. Most were utterly meaningless pictures, that anyone who was able to handle with a paintbrush could paint without needing any talent whatsoever. Compared to what I had been brought up on as art, this was not anything like. With what I consider art, it is as much the skill of the painter as the ability to portray either realistically or metaphorically a concept into a picture that is somehow captivating. Not just a jumble of colors on a canvas or a colored edge around a plain white center.

[@slevinchannel7589]

People think Nude Art is also Art. Pitiful. So unbelievable pitiful. -Just sayin'.

[@trublgrl]

The Art "Industry" is not the Fine Art business. Every day, thousands of talented artists who hone their craft every day are working to sell you their art for nothing or nearly nothing. Advertisement art has been more beautiful and innovative than fine art since the sixties. Comic artists produce enormous quantities of art that serves a story, as do storyboard artists and animators. Digital art in video games is the bleeding edge of design and rendering, whether photo-realistic or highly stylized. Our media culture surrounds us with beautiful things at all hours of the day. To create a collection you love, just save the things that appeal to you, and if you want, grab some frames, print out your favorites, and put them up on your walls, you'll be a collector in no time!

[@megpadgettart]

Just remember to contribute to the artists creating the work if you can. Many of them make nothing or very little, and rely on fans of their work purchasing or donating for support. Creating art is often time consuming, taking hours and hours every week. The more income an artist can generate from their fans, the more time they can afford to dedicate to turning out the art we love rather than another full time job. :) Most artists who aren't in the gallery world or employed with a company are very reasonably and competitively priced, often making pocket change per hour per piece.

[@Flantomas]

Not every illustration is art, regardless of skill, we call skilled illustrators artists as a shorthand catch-all term, but there is a different aproach and different intent that separates the craftsperson from the artist. I say this as a craftsperson that has studied art most of his life.

[@virginiavanni2259]

that's not how a collection is made, not one that's worth anything at least

[@danielwhyatt3278]

I couldn’t agree more. Respect the Manga artists.

[@freespiritedbeing]

This comment needs to be printed and framed.

[@Rurike]

A good time to bring this video back now that NFT`s are taking off, and pretty much have all the same issues. Also something to note is these strategys arnt exclusive to fine art, if you ever wondered why old video games have jacked up massively in price recently or any other market really which seeing a strange skyrocket in growth and making it into auction houses, its probably cause a lot of the same reasons in this video.

[@HomoAlone1]

i worked in a modern art museum before, that harsh truth about so few artist get to shine is so true. There was many artists who just new the museum owner and rich elite personally and we were blue collar workers who serve dinner, alchohol, hold the door etc. for private events for elites and artists. Oh, i forget to say, all of us were fine arts graduates who happened to be middle class / low class. some of us were volunteers who weren't even paid because those fresh graduates wanted to just maybe they may meet an artist and show them their artwork... I hate art world a lot, and i went to fine arts because i wanted to work for video games(also another effed up industry) but people who geniunely love art world, they are being used and hustling day to day.

[@Nick-sw1wr]

someone at Vox is clearly in the club

[@hijack69]

Nick Putigna haha..just came from there

[@galaxiaknight]

I'm just glad that the comment section is aware and didn't fall for Vox's BS

[@MrTed-xi2iz]

Nick Putigna lol I just came from there too

[@JayaSaputra]

That white canvas lady?

[@peterkierstv]

they did it again with jackson pollock, it's on trending now

[@srbrant5391]

As an artist, I want to take a flamethrower to every lazy, dozen-stroked canvas that gets praised for being “genius.”

[@kademcarthur5362]

SR Brant what if the burnt paintings just become even more priceless.

[@rayan-xg5kw]

Modern minimalist art makes my blood boil, seriously

[@naconaco1]

@@kademcarthur5362 incinerate them

[@matthew9677]

Let's do it!!

[@annasolovyeva1013]

So, was the Soviet approach correct? If short, art in the SU would be divided into depictionary art and decorative art. Decorative art is decorating useful objects (e.g. design, architecture, painting porcelain, making wallpaper and textile prints, etc.). Depictionary art is painting and sculptures, etc. depicting objects and ideas. Illustration, theatre/movie art and architecture (allthough with civil engineering being put above architecture) lay in between with their clear function. So, depictionary art had to be produced by an artist with education (education was free), clearly depict objects and ideas that would have to stick to a certain moral code. And the government would allow to sell such art and even order it in quite big amounts. And decorative art had to just look nice, those people are basically employed as designers, their designs (abstract stuff is just treated as a print/ornament here) are their products, and the abstract sketches and clay and cardboard sculptures are just "artistic studies". Look up Deineka as an artist and Leningrad Porcelain abstract designs as the result of this policy. The world seems to forget that DESIGN is where abstract art looks great. Malevich for instance, worked as a designer, and his black square was originally a piece of a theatre background hanged up the way an icon normally would be in Russia to make a hype on scandalous atheism and nihilism.

[@eyre_]

"Can I copy your homework?" "Yeah just change it up a bit so it isn't obvious that you copied." ...and that, my friends, is the story of how NFTs were born.

[@nooneknows3520]

Yup.

[@mirodeluca2586]

From experience working in a NY gallery this is so true. While some post modern work is good and the artists are talented most otherwise talented artists makes stuff the owner or director thinks will sell to rich collectors or art decorators, marks up their work slowly to “protect” their assets and discourages the average person from experiencing or buying the art. Gallery’s don’t have some magic eye that makes them see amazing art that the average person with a college degree in the arts or passion of arts couldn’t recognize, they have an eye for what they can sell at outrageous prices and what they can get an article about in the newspaper.

[@mirahsan2]

Shopping local and online seems to be the way to go, sucks that artists are forced to live such horrible lives. Art should be more appreciated.

[@meowwoof7387]

mirahsan2 Well, art is really important to our lives. Unfortunately, it doesn't make a major impact. Usually, you see just a picture. How does it help you? Does it feed you? Does it keep you financially secure? Damn shame.

[@mirahsan2]

Yeah, it expands your mind and makes us create new tech and new innovations! lol XD But underappreciated. Think Da Vinci.

[@abdulharistmuqorrobin7647]

mirahsan2 for the popular artist whose works already published(?) in big gallery, live is not horrible. they get paid millions of dollar.

[@kitcoakley1357]

I'd like to make a request. Could you make an Adam ruins everything about network Marketing and direct sales.

[@rcalphonse2701]

I hav me Herbalife health shakes for sale 2 for $70

[@DL-rz6tw]

Pyramid schemes?😂

[@HVACSoldier]

I seem to remember an episode of “Murphy Browne,” where her two year old did a painting and the art critics were infatuated by the finger painting.

[@funlover4207]

It happened in real life too 😂🤣😂🤣kzbin.info/www/bejne/kHLckoahpdiBga8

[@blazingmonolith4323]

He should totally do one on how the Academy Awards is a snooty movies club that only pretentious old people watch and how if your not in the producers club or directors list, you dont have a shot in hell of winning.

[@malekf5251]

He did it already, even before this one I think, the name is "ruins the oscars"

[@mikokat]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/p5nJqaJurbWBfbc

[@Akame4514]

No

[@rickyh7352]

“It’s a big club and you ain’t in it.” George Carlin

[@drewcress]

Hey look it's the wine market!

[@zxxNikoxxz]

Somewhat related, he did one on how sommalier lie about their skills.

[@scelestus1353]

If you can't tell the difference between wines then you're just an idiot. I've had people try to "trick" me with wine for years. Doesn't work. I make money and buy good bottles of wine. I enjoy them and they have unique and wonderful tastes. Its like "cool, you must be proud of depriving yourself of this rich set of experiences."

[@scelestus1353]

Yeah, there is definitely diminishing returns as wine gets better and better. But when you have buyers with millions of dollars to spare, they're willing to shell out loads and loads of cash.

[@collinsigbiks9701]

@@scelestus1353 insensitive taste buds makes one stupid?

[@itsnotatoober]

@@scelestus1353 it's funny how " I can tell wines apart " comes from someone saying " I make money". You have no class or you'd realize showing off makes you lose all credibility. Now I think you make 30,000 a year and can't tell the difference between a shoe and a bottle of wine.

[@isaakvandaalen3899]

This applies to most art in general. Famous singers can release bad songs and make millions, while talented nobodies scrape by. A brilliant author might publish a masterpiece, but without good advertising (expensive) or an already established reader base (usually acquired through advertising) they just won't sell as well.

[@mikesamovarov4054]

Yes, selling art is 99.99% marketing and communication/networking.

[@jugglerj0e]

There have been recent studies published about how famous artists are much more likely to be recognized because of who they know and not by their actual artwork. Its more about the connections artists make & networking skills.

[@StuartLynx]

Currently working on a college presentation where all the paintings look like solid colored squares. Yep. I believe you Adam...

[@hanarielgodlike9283]

As a artist, i feel her indignation on my heart... i want to hug her

[@ethelkaye9731]

My dad bought a painting from a street painter in France depicting a morning in the country-side for a thousand dollars... then I go to museums where a 100 grand splatter art sits protected tightly. I gotta tell you, never believed in 'Fine Art' since then.

[@White_Oak_]

I had this figured out in high school... which is why I majored in economics instead of going to art school like so many people urged me to do.

[@SilverScarletSpider]

I love the optimism that art majors have. So much good positive energy.

[@mikesamovarov4054]

Totally great energy. But 99.99% of art majors will never sell any art. Only teaching, if they're lucky 😂

[@hrtlsbstrd]

I hate to break it to you, but everything has zero value beyond what it’s worth to you, or what someone is willing to pay for it

[@aliasbam2750]

Eh, that's postmodernism. But I get what you're saying, though some things do have inherent value and beauty. Most fine art however, does not have inherent beauty. Haha

[@hrtlsbstrd]

Bammer Beauty is in the brain of the beholder, friend

[@hrtlsbstrd]

Alexander Samuseu I’d suggest doing some more research on the neuroscience of perception and sociocultural influences on ideals of beauty 👌 Not that it really affects my original point, which is almost tautologically true

[@jonesjohnson6301]

@@hrtlsbstrd Hello there, how about you do that neuroscience research yourself?! Our perception of beauty didn't come from nothing, it's millions of years of evolution teaching us certain forms and colours indicate different things. Symmetry in faces for instance indicate health. If you're going to claim otherwise, then please back your claim up. As for art, it's inevitably suffered the same disease, which is corporatism and postmodernism. I can respect the early artists to a very modest degree, as they had the original somewhat creative thoughts and were outsiders. Those today are shills selling to the rich guys, protesting nothing really and trying to act as if they're outsiders, when they're really mainstream. The reason why that pisses me so off isn't just the huge amounts of taxpayer money spent on it, not just the immorality of the cash grabs and money laundering, no, it's also the sheer amount of talent, skills and knowledge that are being lost.

[@hrtlsbstrd]

Jones Johnson You’re on the right track 👍

[@MohammedMuaawia]

Thank god for digital prints and reproduction canvases.

[@Malik_Hoff]

Not so Fast.. in 1972 The Regal Art Syste..... Lmao

[@D8W2P4]

@@rdallas1614 >Caring about copyright. Get a load of this guy.

[@Arkayjiya]

@@D8W2P4 Copyright is a load of horseshit for most of it, but smaller artists really suffer from the copyright infringement on their property. I've always been for piracy in general because it basically allows to escape all kind of frauds and test the product, but it affects indies disproportionately so I never do it when it comes to them.

[@D8W2P4]

@@Arkayjiya The "intellectual property" method of "legal" money printing shouldn't be recognized as legitimate. Don't care how big or small they are.

[@Arkayjiya]

@@D8W2P4 THe "IP" mthod of money printing is literally selling your hard-crafted art for money to make a living which is almost impossible if it's available for free (or simply undercut by big corporation who just scourge the net to take your art and resell it lower than you can afford to) everywhere. I mean maybe in a world where capitalism is over and universal income exists it might also make sense to remove IP laws entirely but not in the current world.

[@dracolithfiend3121]

In the US tax loopholes via psuedo altruism is still big. I think a few years ago some billionaire in Texas was caught donating money as a tax writeoff to a charity he ran who then used the money to buy school supplies from his own company at a huge markup. If you expect a tax writeoff for a donation then it isn't a donation.

[@ACDBunnie]

Yeah, unfortunately that is a problem here. I'm not proud and don't like it.

[@billybobjoe198]

This, I don't understand why donations are tax deductible.

[@thisishandlenumber2048]

​@@billybobjoe198 Think of it as choosing where your tax dollars go. You own the government $40K but if you donate $40K to a charity they let it slide because you're (ideally) putting $40k back into your community, the government is meant to serve the people after all. Where it goes wrong is like in the story mentioned above, some guy donated to a charity that he owned and then used those "donations" to further his own profit, at that point he's putting more money into himself which shouldn't count. In theory the system is fair, either pay the government to help your community or donate to a charity that also helps your community. Unfortunately due to corruption and the countless loopholes the current system just sucks all the butts.

[@Demi.d3mi]

@@thisishandlenumber2048 the government is corrupt, but they leave the loophole so no one realizes that they steal our money for themselves. They give us breadcrumbs of our own bread we gave them.

[@teddy9770]

Moral of the story is that you should buy art only if you like it for what it is and not try to use it as an investment.

[@petelee2477]

This isn't a secret normal people laugh at the "fine art" community

[@Narutofan825]

He is trying to get people to follow him. Next thing he will do is say slavery is immoral.

[@mshaqed2538]

Worst part about the fine art market is that in sometimes the buyer and the seller are essentially the exact same person, and they just use paintings as a way to launder their illegally obtained money and hide it's origins, which is easy since most art deals are completely secret and hidden from the public.

[@mikesamovarov4054]

Sometimes, not as a rule.

[@charleneroyal7381]

Hunter Biden

[@fairystail1]

out of curiosity how does that work? the 'buyer' would still have to explain where he got the money from wouldnt he? Its not like laundromats or casinos where paying in cash is so common that its easy as pie to use for laundering.

[@Rowe104]

Who didn’t already notice this? I’ve known this since I was told Jackson Pollick paintings were “priceless”

[@louscrewed1060]

As an aspiring artist this annoys me as I spend a very long time coming up with ideas and drawing/painting and know I will struggle to make a reasonable profit from it. I think there are a lot of artists who are very dedicated to what they do but the exclusivity and pretention of the few individuals at the 'top' so to speak makes it difficult for us to make this a feasible career.

[@--------8453]

terminology “Artist” derived from the region (mainly The U.K.) of western-most Europe at a time when “Crafsmen” & their buyers had had enough of creating works which werent recognized as ꜰᴜɴᴄᴛɪᴏɴᴀʟ ((like transportation apparatuses or furniture {{recognized as Craftsman's work back in those ages}} for example)) A new identification was dubbed: “Artists”; to distinguish between the type of worx being made to appeal to buyers'. The 1st Artist institution(school/academy) was founded in or geographically near The U.K. 1 of the Nations that would MUCH LATER colonize Africa, so it's mostly been a Eurocentric (Euro-Ethnocentric & Ameri-euro-Ethnocentric) Buyers Market over the millennium[s].

[@OneTrueMomo]

As an artist myself I feel the pain.

[@CartoonLab]

This makes a lot of sense, and of course many people try to save face by agreeing with this kind of crap, so they can say they too are sophisticated art critics. I think I heard of an artist who took a urinal, signed it and suddenly it's art.

[@L.Ayad16]

The artist you are probably thinking of is Marcel Duchamp. He was the first artist to turn a ready-made object into a piece of "art" by signing it in 1917. He would actually find your comment truthful, as he made Fountain in order to force ourselves to question how we define art and its value (is an already-made or mass produced object "art" because someone put their signature on it? These are the kinds of questions he wanted viewers to ask themselves).

[@The1sillygirly]

I was about to say the same thing

[@omk573]

Thats not how it happened. The artist saw that there was a gallery that said it would take any art. So he put the urinal in there, but the gallery denied it and didn't put it in, this made the artist very mad so he started to try to put it in other galeries and failed. Eventually the news made something about it which increased its vaule. Though i don't believe the artist made any money off of the urinal since the original was destroyed, so most museums have a recreation of the piece. And the piece is called "foutain"

[@bcx1138]

teachers told us this in MFA school (early 90s) this vid explains it perfectly and should be used in BFA and MFA programs

[@TwelvetreeZ]

I like how this is something I knew already, but Adam & co are able to explain WHY the prices of famous works of art are so arbitary. God bless this show 🙏

[@pinktrash2720]

I was a gallery artist before i move into design work in video games. It's when i watched a documentary of Banksy that really did it for me.

[@mychannelhasonly1videojust316]

that's why Ivanka Trump is so into art

[@Nictator42]

More like _everyone_ in Washington and Wall Street, but ya, p much

[@zibzo7180]

Brett Olsen Dude chill, it's a joke.

[@Theproclaimed]

Brett Olsen but trump has already doomed the planet....

[@ichijofestival2576]

You *dare* to accuse Ivanka, a rich person with an interest in an obvious scam, of being party to an obvious scam!? I mean, it's not like there's a family history of donating "art" to their own country clubs. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, wait 'til you know its political allegiances before you accuse it of being a duck.

[@fifzeppelin]

@@Cooler3546 imagine getting this triggered by a joke

[@joiab11]

I'm an artist and this makes me feel so much better! LOL! Thank you for the honesty, you could add how my pricey MFA is a scam too!!! Whoever wrote this deserves a huge thank you from me!

[@edi9892]

I know an arts dealer that whitnessed how a chinese porcellain figurine changed its value from 50 USD to 2 million. In a backyard sale it was purchased for 50 and it was sold to my aquaintance for 200. It might have been worth 2000, but he didn't want to pay more, since it's provenience was dubvious and it could very well be a cheap 19th c fake (yep, even then they sold fakes to British tourists). He was able to sell it for 2000, but had failed repetitly to sell it to reputable auction houses for the same reasons. However, the after changing hands two more times it was sold in the auciton house he originally intended by a renowned art collector...

[@edi9892]

TLDR: buyers will try to keep prices low calling it fake, or focussing on damage and you need a big name to sell stuff high.

[@greywolf1721]

Remember the Mona Lisa was not thought of as a priceless painting till after it was stolen. It was left on display with no protection. I don't remember but I think it was even not noticed to be missing for several days.

[@oneocean4364]

Art is a cure to boredom , the more art the better. But when money is involved it gets tricky. You define what art is and forget the money. There is beauty in all art no matter how silly or simple it looks.

[@silverdamascus2023]

NFTs are basically a way to do this with digital art, making a PNG, JPG and GIF file that you can easily upload and download for free, become an unique piece like paintings.

[@Heritagepostfarms]

They are worth a lot of money....because people THINK they are worth a lot of money. Supply and demand. Most buy the art as "investments", which drives up the price of all art

[@ignacioc.delacruz1042]

This video made me think of the movie "Velvet Buzzsaw." The art world became more about sales and dollar signs than it did about the art itself.

[@kaoko111]

I'm weird, i like museums but not art museums. I like science, and some galleries like historic articles. That kind of thing. But for paintings i look for compilation books. I got a few of classics like Picasso, Van Gogh, Velazquez, Dali. But for some reason i don't like art museums that much. I think i got a real reason now.

[@jurgisneverdauskis536]

Well that's because almost all post-modern art galleries are a complete sham and hold no real art inside of them.

[@ghost21501]

Go to publicly funded art museums. They contain historically significant work. It is much better to look at the actual painting, not the reproduction.

[@wordforger]

Eh, I enjoy art museums still. I just prefer to take in paintings on their own merits rather than listening to whatever tripe some snooty museum curator type comes up with to try to explain to me why I should be moved by a circle on a white background, or bragging about how I was looking at the most expensive piece in the museum, or telling me the swirls of black on white were supposed to represent anger. I much prefer getting lost in the intricate details of the old masters where it feels like you could reach in and pull out a flower, or the abstract geometries of Picasso, of admiring the clever use of color and contrast in a work of abstraction, or the perfect proportions of a Roman goddess. I enjoy art for its own sake, not because someone somewhere says it's a work of genius, or arbitrarily decided it should be expensive. If it's something utterly ridiculous, I laugh and move on to examining something far more interesting.

[@megpadgettart]

Art museums keep you at such a distance from the work that i feel like you can't connect with it in any meaningful manner. You just shuffle through, glancing at the work and moving on. I understand the need to protect their collection, but it seems inevitable that by taking out elements of interaction and time with the art, you devalue the experience. The exception is big installment projects.

[@virginiavanni2259]

museums and galleries are two different things. galleries' main objective is to sell, whereas museums exist to conserve art and educate the public.

[@captkill3304]

I've heard TV shows are similar. Networks only give the green light on stuff they decide is good and stuff they personally would watch. Especially Fox

[@SeanTheOriginal]

Literally NFTs.

[@leahpope8672]

Oh man, that's so disgusting! 😮What a disgrace and a shame for true artists.

[@malcolmnicoll1165]

"The table is tilted folk. The game is rigged." -George Carlin

[@JJ-no7bc]

Whats sad is people are really going to trash this video because of its honest truth

[@SilverScarletSpider]

Liked for the content. I don't care for collegehumor, these videos belong here.

[@zachantes1161]

Dark Man Well, I mean, Adam ruins everything I've owned by TruTv now, so of course it would be here and not on college humor.

[@SilverScarletSpider]

Zach Antes Yeah, unfortunately Apparently collegehumor still owns the character of "Adam" and has the rights to post their videos first. It's the same colbert report comedy central copyright bs.

[@Speedinglobster]

Dark Man Well, no, they use people from CollegeHumor like Emily and her husband, and Katie appeared in one of the episodes

[@jowt5588]

The painting straight opposite the Mona Lisa in the Louvre is waaaay waaaaaay more impressive imo

[@Skelyboss]

I know it's 3 years ooooold but. The Mona Lisa wasnt even that famous before it was stolen. And was basically nothing compared to other Da Vinci's works before Napoleon had it

[@tortugabob]

Jackson Pollack, Lee Krasner, Mark Rothko (Markus Yakovlevich Rothkowitz), Andy Warhol and many other "great" artists were the beneficiaries of this insider industry.

[@MrUnidyne]

Track down the story of Norman Rockwell's painting "The Connoisseur" (which he painted as a cover for the magazine Saturday Evening Post). It's a well dressed man staring at a faux Jackson Pollock "painting", that Rockwell created by literally throwing paint at a canvas on the floor of his studio. Rockwell submitted a section of the sample painting to an exhibition at the Cooperstown Art Association in New York, signing the canvas with an Italian signature. It took first prize for painting. Another section of the abstract canvas, signed "Percival," won Honorable Mention at a Berkshire Museum exhibition.

[@tryptala]

It's the same with all collectibles. It's all part of the financialization and commodification of everything which now includes life itself. In the end, though, the most valuable art is the art that changes the world, and that's more likely determined by art historians, and the financial payoff may not be in the artist's lifetime.

[@tryptala]

@Alvino A Don't let cynicism color your whole world, my friend. It's a distorted view of the world.

[@tryptala]

​@Alvino A Art, philosophy, science, politics, etc.--they're all interconnected to change the collective minds of the human race. Yes, there's conflict--mostly over resources--sometimes leading to dark ages--but even in dark ages much of the accomplishments of previous generations are preserved by some so that a renaissance will occur and concentrated progress recontinued. The classical golden mean, for instance, returns in new design, architecture, and those new designs lead to new types of human interaction. Rigid thought is one of the major sources leading to stagnation or conflict. Classical guidelines of painting led to a limiting redundancy in the late 19th Century. In painting, an abandonment of classicism began, such as with the Impressionists. That abandoning continued into the 20th Century, such as with Expressionism. Pollock furthered the break of prevailing expressionist concepts of what art must be in a new extreme way, Previously in the century, Einstein's relativity broke out of the rigidity of Newton's universe, but as opposed to the colossal singular achievement of Einstein, Pollock was only one of many participating artists in the changes in the art of his day, so there's often an over estimation of him by some as the most profound painter of his time. Most radical does not necessarily mean most profound. The societal developments of Pollock's time, post WWII, coincided with new forms of political and philosophical liberation and a new restructuring of the world. Without the break from rigid tradition that the ancient Greeks achieved we would not be at the type of civilization we are in today--even after centuries of conflict, destruction, and dark ages. We might still be in the iron age. Many many forms of the production of genius and openness, individually and collectively, move the human race forward, despite the many failings along the way. All life must evolve. It's actually conflict that stimulates much evolution, but at the same time, new ways of exploiting resources can force rapid evolution, and new resources include new ideas, many of which you find in the arts. Evolution always changes the world. New ideas change mankind, but not always for the good--but bad ideas are always in competition with good ideas, and that conflict new ends, and human life moves forward. What mostly distinguishes humans from other life forms is what's happening evolutionary with our brains. You gotta see the broad broad picture.

[@tryptala]

​@Alvino A It's advancement in science that created that cell phone. There's advancement in all kinds of thought. Was the New Testament an advancement on the Old Testament? Was Buddhism an advancement on Hinduism? Was the U.S. Constitution an advancement on thought? What's your favorite movie? Was that an advancement on the art form? Was Kubrick's movie _The Shining_ an advancement on the novel. Whether advancements are good or bad is always debatable. Whether there is a teleological movement in human achievement is a debatable topic. There are people who analyze and weigh information, evidence, and others' opinions, and there are NPC sheeple who just follow the herded. There are many people who are aware of all the things you mention, and a lot of them become aware of these things through the arts. It's nearly impossible to know about spirituality without the arts. Much of spirituality is wrapped up in the arts. How do you know about the Roman Empire? Through history books, or through the movies? The virus has been heavily politicized. Not surprising, especially in an election year. There are many of us joining you in the pursuit of the truth. Masks have not been proven to block the virus. They're a joke and maybe cause harm in many ways. Sweden did not lock down, did not mandate masks, did not close their schools, and their death curve is the same as every other country which has been through the infection cycle and is down to near 0 levels. The recent spikes began after the mass protests in June. But there are cases of deaths of perfectly healthy people. You're not alone in searching for the truth. Now we have the leak of the George Floyd body cam and the forensic reports which show the actual truth about how he died. The narratives of the BLM movement are almost all BS, as well. You are not alone.

[@kaunas88]

In the past paintings could be judged by the quality of the skill and craftmanship of paintings. Today modern art is generally so abstract/ rough that art is only "genius" if someone of authority decides that he can see something "special" in the work, a quality which unfortunately is so subtle and yet profound that mere mortals cannot appreciate it. Thus we have all of this dense pretentious intellectual text trying to sell us on why a painting is so "superior"...but it is really a bunch of BS marketing hype.

[@saralowrie1307]

This just made me feel better about being an artist

[@dinotopher770]

the impressionists ;monet, gauguin,etc. were also part of this B.S. they lived in a time when only realistic paintings were considered worthy. so they as a group "created" the impressionist genera to set themselves apart from their competition . they also courted (convinced) wealthy women to "see" the value in their work. because they worked as a group of established artists they were able to convince the art world their work had value. BTW they were also able to crank out paintings much faster because the detail in an impressionist painting is 1/4 of what a realistic painting requires.

[@deconstructyouridols]

This isn't accurate, historically. At all. Their critics grouped them into this categorization of "impressionists," because they saw them as being "impressions" of real art, they accepted this title in protest. They did receive mixed reviews, a lot of critics just wanted realest paintings but the public loved their works. They were not able to "crank out" work because of detail. A lot of their work has an extraordinary amount of effort in creating the effect without detail They also didn't have to mix their paint, and painted wet, which means they didn't have to wait for the paint to dry. I love the sexist--let's blame rich flighty women who are easily tricked though. That's fun.

[@gavinreid5387]

They are realistic.

[@YoukuroKageStudios]

Imagine how NFTs will play in the gallery game…

[@godzilla964]

The fetish art on Deviantart is more valuable than modern art.

[@governmentofcommunistchina2772]

Fax

[@samuraiartguy]

I’ve known this since junior year in College - that would be 1978 - at Pratt Institute, one of the best Art Schools in the World. All it takes a one hike down the Gallery Row on 57th street and you know dam well that you fellow students are doing work just as good, and in some cases, bettter.

[@iggysfriend4431]

This completely sums up the world art market. There was a British TV programme where they had about 10 people make 3 pieces of "art" in a car breakers yard in 10 minutes. All of the "artists" had no art training or knowledge of art, they all had every days jobs or were unemployed. They then hired a small London art gallery and some actors. The actors posed as the mysterious Polish artist, their agent and the gallery owner. The paintings were given outrageous prices, which was very funny as they were all done in about 3 minutes each by random people in a scrap yard. They then hid cameras everywhere and even had a TV crew to cover the opening as the artist was such and important new discovery. Then the TV company invited loads of so called art experts to come and enthuse over the work, which they did. They said amazing things on camera about the art and and the artist. The programme then ran a film of the artworks being created. Within seconds the famous London art critics made a dash for the door. The scam was up and they had been publicly embarrass on national TV. I forget the name of the TV programme, but if I can find it I will edit my comment and post the name and hopefully a URL.

[@NikkiBudders]

this is why you buy cheap rip offs. You save so much money for a painting nobody is going to notice.

[@lortep458]

Adam: Well actually....

[@blxdegenix3083]

Nikki Budders o

[@zatharos6427]

When Banksy shredded his own painting when some rich millionaire bought it…

[@gavinreid5387]

This increased its value due to the extra publicity.

[@Demi.d3mi]

The name says everything lol its just money

[@videakias3000]

I remember I saw a video on youtube,some guy visited a museum one of the paintings was just 2 squares with different size and color and it was worth 22 millions.over 4 times the world;s most expensive car.

[@PrometheusMMIV]

3:40 "You owe $40 million in taxes" "What if I donate this painting worth $40 million?" Then you would only save about $15 million on your taxes, and still owe about $25 million. Because tax deductions don't directly offset your taxes, just your taxable income.

[@maad1670]

Now, Enter NFT. I'd say it'll even be more prevalent this year.

[@shubhaamgokko1361]

One irony about the art market that I noticed is that a lot of artists struggle to make ends meet their entire life and when they become famous posthumously, it's just the person holding that art who enjoys the fruits of the dead artist's labor

[@castironbandito]

NFTs are even worse. A lot of them aren't even great and you could lose money if you tried to get into them. There's a good reason why NFTs are considered a scam.

[@matodion]

2:24 sounded like auctioneer was rapping.

[@syeevetaylor5980]

Isn't the fashion world the same thing?

[@deconstructyouridols]

Every industry is the same thing. This is kind of the problem with this video.

[@carpy1252]

No wonder the owner of the art gallery near me always looks so happy even though it never seems he gets any business. There's some things going on backstage we don't know about.

[@jesperaung8592]

You know, this is sort of like NFTs

[@blackmachinima2711]

The selling of it. Economizing art is the gaff. You are choosing the art of money over the unique artists art. The making of fine art is to “make knowledge visible.”

[@ravenvinnie6062]

As an indie artists...this...this just gives me...SO MUCH MARKETING AMMO! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I'm comin' for ya Sotheby's!

[@Parkerbirds]

Some modern art can be really good and the skill and the supplies used in it can add up to thousands. Although the fine art market can be really bad and full of scams. I agree. As an artist it is so frustrating.

[@jonasvm]

you should do one on the music industry/business

[@Rhue2]

Finally, I understand the appeal of NFTs

[@calebshonk5838]

I'm no elite art connoisseur, but even I can tell the difference between art and bs.

[@UC_Fran]

I know many artists who show in galleries and sell art. They may not be in the highest echelon of the art market but you don't need to be there to be a successful artist. Out of the 7 billion people on the planet you only need a very small fraction to see and buy your art in order to have personal success. In fact, art is everywhere, everywhere you go and everywhere you look artists have had a hand at some point. Art degrees may not be as typically lucrative as medical degrees but studio art classes are no joke and require good project management skills and incredible amounts of time to complete. These skills can easily transfer to other occupations. The bar should not be set on requiring international fame and fortune for art to be a worthwhile endeavor.

[@ThePokemonSoldier]

Proof is how a Jackson Pollock, which is literally just of bunch of paint splatter, sells in the same range as famous Manets.

[@carnivorousjazz827]

No, Jackson Pollock was both very skilled, innovative, and drove art forward significantly by expanding fields like performance art. His stuff has massive historical relevance. If you read more into his history he seems like the kind of person who would be mildly disgusted people are trying so hard to force deeper meaning onto his work and ridiculously overinflating the value of it.

[@TheWhitePhoenix2]

ThePokemonSoldier and media was expanding at the time due to TVs being more common place so the behind the scenes of how these paintings were made fascinated the public. (De Kooning was famous for him running up to the canvas and splattering paint on it) plus earlier in this episode, he mentioned that everyone hated abstract expressionism but used it to show other countries how free America was.

[@OtakuUnitedStudio]

Pollock's work was actually based on fractal patterns. It's not as random as it initially appears. Still doesn't mean it's that great.

[@sudharamakrishnan5766]

OtakuUnitedStudio I don't think Pollock meant to make art based on fractal pattern. For him it was a skilled splattering of paints that had a pattern. I suppose it was later on that a fractal pattern was discovered....

[@CheapSushi]

Now yeah, but he had the right direction at the right time with the right message. Now it's so like "duh" but at the time no one was really pushing that kind of expression. It's more about the context than what it really is.

[@Tonya-gi1ms]

"Please sir, I just want one painting that doesn't talk to me." L0L Love the Harry Potter reference

[@ismJoboi]

Expensive art are like nft of the internet

[@bicyclist2]

I very briefly used to work in a art gallery in Michigan back in the 90's. Thankfully I didn't see a lot of the shady dealings shown here. I've seen some of the modern art at our Ohio cities art museum, and thought to myself, "I could create something better looking than that". Thanks.