NFT Art

[sgolby]

I don’t even know what clubhouse is lol

[Deleted]

Anyone else think Crypto/NFT etc are the new 2YK scam???

[Woodey1001]

Isn't this just rich people creating and then buying their own product/scam to try and create a new art market?

[nex]

I love the transparency of ownership and prices realised via nft, I think the digital medium offers a glimpse of digital canvases and democratised art for a new generation ... are there issues? Yes clearly. Will ppl get burnt? Yes clearly. But I don’t see a whole heap of difference between this and most new forms of expression scaring the old folk ‘who don’t get it’.

[sgolby]

Mar 8, 2021 0:23:58 GMT 1 nex said:

I love the transparency of ownership and prices realised via nft, I think the digital medium offers a glimpse of digital canvases and democratised art for a new generation ... are there issues? Yes clearly. Will ppl get burnt? Yes clearly. But I don’t see a whole heap of difference between this and most new forms of expression scaring the old folk ‘who don’t get it’.

How do you see this as democratised art?! Find me a place that talks about this in any way other than invesment. Art is already wildly democratic. Not hype or bluechip art, but just about anyone can find something or someone they like or love for their walls already. Sure the banksy market has gone bananas, but there is a wide world of comparable art out there at very affordable prices. Just saying.

As for old folk who don’t get it. Not getting it has nothing to do with age, it has to do with appreciation for the technique and the method. Digital art just feels a bit cheap, there is not mastery of technique, just mastery of a program.

I guess it is all up to taste. Personally i don’t think i will ever hang a digital canvas, just like i will never display a digital photograph anywhere but my home screen.

[nex]

Mar 8, 2021 0:49:14 GMT 1 sgolby said:

Mar 8, 2021 0:23:58 GMT 1 nex said:

I love the transparency of ownership and prices realised via nft, I think the digital medium offers a glimpse of digital canvases and democratised art for a new generation ... are there issues? Yes clearly. Will ppl get burnt? Yes clearly. But I don’t see a whole heap of difference between this and most new forms of expression scaring the old folk ‘who don’t get it’.

How do you see this as democratised art?! Find me a place that talks about this in any way other than invesment. Art is already wildly democratic. Not hype or bluechip art, but just about anyone can find something or someone they like or love for their walls already. Sure the banksy market has gone bananas, but there is a wide world of comparable art out there at very affordable prices. Just saying.

As for old folk who don’t get it. Not getting it has nothing to do with age, it has to do with appreciation for the technique and the method. Digital art just feels a bit cheap, there is not mastery of technique, just mastery of a program.

I guess it is all up to taste. Personally i don’t think i will ever hang a digital canvas, just like i will never display a digital photograph anywhere but my home screen.

I don’t think I need to add anything really

[Ravnur 2020]

I think these new formats and ways of viewing and distributing art are interesting and challenging the norms in many ways. Personally I have gotten into VR and AR art and enjoy it very much. I agree there has to be skill and thought involved and not just hype, gimmicks and money talk.

[Ottomatik]

Just got the Pobel email for this shite.
So stupid.
I just can’t...

Breaks my heart that my loves Handiedan and Jeff Soto jumped on this (IMHO) train bound to nowhere.

Just can’t wrap my head around...
‘Let me show you this amazing piece of art I own...damnit(!) my iPhone doesn’t have any power left... give me a second to recharge.....’

[Erik Ibiza]

This whole NFT thing makes me think of something I did successfully a few years ago...
Using Topps trading card apps to make money on Ebay. Sold this Han Solo card twice.

io9.gizmodo.com/how-the-hell-is-this-jpg-of-han-solo-worth-225-1726156785

[Lee Ellis Art]

I think it's an interesting time for the at world. I do think nothing beats a physical art work, but digital seems to be the way forward for some collectors. Most likely collectors already invested in crypto and perhaps like the idea of ownership without having physical pieces in their home. It's all quite surreal really. As an artist I think it's worth a punt. As a collector however, it's too early to say.
I've recently minted a couple of pieces that originally started life as oil paintings and then transformed into something different in the digital realm. It's a bit of fun, if nothing else.

Does anyone own any crypto art yet?

[jimmyjam]

NFTs could/will bring massive regulations to the crypto world, which is not what crypto people want. NFT is simply money laundering at the moment.

This is not going to end well.

So tweets are worth millions now? www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/07/tech/jack-dorsey-nft-twitter/index.html

Again what’s to stop anyone from going around photographing everything making them into a NFT and calling it their own. I noticed that a few artists in NFTY Gateway were using other artists images as their own. Copyright is going to be a huge issue with all this.

[Reader]

Mar 8, 2021 15:46:12 GMT 1 jimmyjam said:

NFTs could/will bring massive regulations to the crypto world, which is not what crypto people want. NFT is simply money laundering at the moment.

This is not going to end well.

So tweets are worth millions now? www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/07/tech/jack-dorsey-nft-twitter/index.html

Again what’s to stop anyone from going around photographing everything making them into a NFT and calling it their own. I noticed that a few artists in NFT were using other artists images in their own. Copyright is going to be a huge issue with all this.

Yep, already a spate of works that are just direct copies of other artists work, work photographed in situ and worked ripped off from instagram. As soon as copyright lawyers catch up with this, there'll be carnage.

[jimmyjam]

It might be wise not to put any of your own work on instagram at the moment or any of your prints or art pieces you own.

Some jack ass might be going around screenshooting everything right now and making them into NFTs. The money being made of this MASSIVE SCAM is going to bring out the crazies. If you have a photo of a print with the edition number and signature you might want to take those off now or edit that information out. It sounds crazy and paranoid, it could be, but people do shitty and crazy things when they know they could make money off of it. 

I can see people trying to make NFT COAs or art copies - for works they don't own and sell them.

This is going to bring a TON of money to lawyers and law makers in the next few months.

Tim Draper and The Winklevoss twins are getting way too greedy with all this. They did well with crypto coins but pushing this NFT, I think, will cause a very rude awakening to the entire crypto world.

Bay Area tech companies have made trillions off scamming people over the decades. It'll be interesting to watch these Billionaires try and lobby/pay off government officials around the world to make this scam work. I think I read Facebook has more lobbyists in Europe than they do anywhere in the world. Tim Draper, who is really pushing this NFTs, has a TON of power in the bay area and around the world. He will make another billion from this scam before it crashes. A name you should really remember. www.nytimes.com/2020/12/14/technology/big-tech-lobbying-europe.html

[kuni]

Mar 8, 2021 15:17:39 GMT 1 Lee Ellis Art said:

I think it's an interesting time for the at world. I do think nothing beats a physical art work, but digital seems to be the way forward for some collectors. Most likely collectors already invested in crypto and perhaps like the idea of ownership without having physical pieces in their home. It's all quite surreal really. As an artist I think it's worth a punt. As a collector however, it's too early to say.
I've recently minted a couple of pieces that originally started life as oil paintings and then transformed into something different in the digital realm. It's a bit of fun, if nothing else.

Does anyone own any crypto art yet?

Given the reception NFT's have received here maybe I'm crazy for admitting that i do own a handful of pieces. Currently only own NFT's from artists who I was already a fan of the physical work. I'm dabbling. I don't see them going anyway anytime soon, but likely 95% of them (or more) will be worthless in 3 years. 

[Lee Ellis Art]

Mar 8, 2021 17:29:45 GMT 1 kuni said:

Mar 8, 2021 15:17:39 GMT 1 Lee Ellis Art said:

I think it's an interesting time for the at world. I do think nothing beats a physical art work, but digital seems to be the way forward for some collectors. Most likely collectors already invested in crypto and perhaps like the idea of ownership without having physical pieces in their home. It's all quite surreal really. As an artist I think it's worth a punt. As a collector however, it's too early to say.
I've recently minted a couple of pieces that originally started life as oil paintings and then transformed into something different in the digital realm. It's a bit of fun, if nothing else.

Does anyone own any crypto art yet?

Given the reception NFT's have received here maybe I'm crazy for admitting that i do own a handful of pieces. Currently only own NFT's from artists who I was already a fan of the physical work. I'm dabbling. I don't see them going anyway anytime soon, but likely 95% of them (or more) will be worthless in 3 years. 

Ha ha, brave admission. 
I can't see any harm in dabbling at this stage, especially in artists you already like. After all you buy what you like and it supports (as far as I'm aware) the artists and allows then to create more physical works. There are a lot of awful pieces out there though. I don't understand the vast majority and those particular pieces I can't see having any longevity at all. The rest though I imagine will be held in high esteem. What sites do you use? I'm trialling rarible. 

[jimmyjam]

How I Became a Professional NFT Artist "It took three hours, a partial understanding of some esoteric concepts, and $1,300, but I did it."

Great Article
link

onezero.medium.com/how-i-became-a-professional-nft-artist-well-sort-of-d1597d2b3ddb

"What if I just uploaded old paintings that aren’t copyrighted? Would that be considered art?

Publications wrote that perhaps this incident represented the “top” of the NFT bubble — for my sake, I hoped they were wrong.The idea of “art theft” is controversial in the NFT world. Users have found accounts on Rarible that take other digital artists’ art without permission, creating NFTs and attempting to sell them. Users diverge on where the lines should be drawn.

What about images that were in the public domain? What if I just uploaded old paintings that aren’t copyrighted? Would that be considered art?

Thinking this was my best idea yet, 10 minutes of internet sleuthing brought me to the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s “Open Access” Program. They had uploaded over 400,000 images of art in the public domain and released all copyright claims on the pictures. They were free to be used in any form, for any reason, without attribution.

My next step was searching for “the most famous work at the Met.” Shortly, I had downloaded The Death Of Socrates. The optimist in me thought that uploading this could provide an interesting commentary on the lines of what constitutes art — does reformatting something create something new? The realist in me thought it was the only way to upload something without breaking the rules.

File uploaded.

Next, I was asked if I wanted to create my own “collection” or put it under the general “Rarible collection.” Figuring real art would have its own “collection,” I selected that option.
Collection Name? This Is Not Art
Description? These are very much not art."

Interesting article if you want to become a NFT artist in 3 hours.

Last thing - those who think people who don't understand NFTs are "old" or "old school"... just realize that mostly the main players behind NFTs (and crypto) are in their late 30's to 60's old men/women in silicon valley who have done these tech pump and dumps before, are very successful at it, and will make a billions off this before it crashes. Tim Draper is 62 and Winklevoss Twins are 39. The 20 years old are the ones flipping NFT art for a few hundred dollars while the "old" men/women in the bay area are make billions off this scam... NFT to me is being all done by the old players in tech not young 20 year olds.

[kuni]

Mar 8, 2021 17:33:28 GMT 1 Lee Ellis Art said:

Mar 8, 2021 17:29:45 GMT 1 kuni said:

Given the reception NFT's have received here maybe I'm crazy for admitting that i do own a handful of pieces. Currently only own NFT's from artists who I was already a fan of the physical work. I'm dabbling. I don't see them going anyway anytime soon, but likely 95% of them (or more) will be worthless in 3 years. 

Ha ha, brave admission. 
I can't see any harm in dabbling at this stage, especially in artists you already like. After all you buy what you like and it supports (as far as I'm aware) the artists and allows then to create more physical works. There are a lot of awful pieces out there though. I don't understand the vast majority and those particular pieces I can't see having any longevity at all. The rest though I imagine will be held in high esteem. What sites do you use? I'm trialling rarible. 

Agree the vast majority of the art on all of these platforms is rubbish and will be swept into the dustbin of history sooner rather than later. I think you're seeing a pretty low bar for what people are willing to purchase that should likely move towards higher and higher quality as more legit artists get into the space. For example, when Invader or Nava drop an NFT and it's $5k, it's going to make it a lot harder to justify spending $5k on Steve Nobodyface. There's also a massive discrepancy between physical and NFT that has to work itself out - people paying $200k for a 1/1 NFT when the artist sells a large canvas for $15k. 

It's been eye opening to talk to digital natives in their twenties who would actually take a NFT over the physical equivalent. We can talk shit about it all we want, and i personally think it's ridiculous, but there are a lot of people out there for who this is the case. They don't have physical walls to display the work or their digital identity is more important to them than their physical. It's a wild dynamic that's easy to disregard that I'm trying to understand. 

I've bought on niftygateway and open sea. I feel like superrare is where most of my favorite artists are setting up shop though, but haven't managed to purchase anything i've offered on. There are a fair # of the artists that many of us collect releasing NFT's.

There's a lot of price discovery going on so I want a little exposure to the space but not enough to make a difference if/when it implodes. i'm trying to take it slow and learn as much as i can about it. 

[rungsp]

Matt Levine writes on Financial Markets stuff for Bloomberg.
He is unusually witty, yet manages to explain the inexplicable at time.

Today:

A Banksy is cancelled
I have mostly resisted writing about non-fungible tokens (NFTs), because they are not so much financial news as they are, uh, art news? The idea of an NFT is that you can buy sports memorabilia or art, but on the blockchain. Like there is a clip of LeBron James dunking a basketball, or a GIF of Nyan Cat, and they are more or less freely available on the internet, but you can buy a unique non-fungible copy of, or pointer to, the clip or the GIF proving that, in some sense, you own it. And that pointer is registered on a blockchain, and you can tell everyone “well, sure, anyone can look at Nyan Cat, but I own the real one.”
Of course this is stupid but it’s not so much stupider than anything else. I can look at the Mona Lisa on my computer too, even though the Louvre owns the real one. Well, no, I do think there are some real advantages to owning physical paintings. I’d rather have the original Mona Lisa in my living room than look at it on my computer. But the traditional markets for baseball cards and sports memorabilia are harder to distinguish from NFTs. The scuffed baseball that Barry Bonds hit into the stands for his 73rd home run in 2001 is not a particularly interesting physical object; you can buy a dozen nicer, newer, cleaner baseballs for $17.85 on Amazon. The home-run ball is a unique pointer to a memorable event, but it is not intuitively obvious that you should ascribe any value to that. A Mickey Mantle rookie card is a piece of cardboard with a picture and some stats printed on it, who cares. Why not print it on the blockchain.
So, sure, NFTs, whatever. Still this is kind of nuts:
Banksy isn’t the only person publicly destroying Banksy artworks now. In the latest stunt in the craze for NFTs (Non Fungible Tokens), which have captured the imagination of many digital enthusiasts and a growing sector of the art world, a company called Injective Protocol purchased a Banksy work and converted it into an NFT—and then burned it on video.
Injective Protocol is a so-called DeFI (“decentralized finance”) platform that builds Wall Street-style derivatives using blockchain-based smart contracts. It bought Banksy’s Morons (White) (2006), depicting a crowded auction room with an ornately framed piece beside the auctioneer inscribed with the words “I can’t believe you morons actually buy this shit.” …
In a video posted on the BurntBanksy Twitter account and on YouTube, a representative of the company explains that, come on, they had to burn the physical piece because, if it still existed, the value would remain primarily there, rather than in the digital asset.
So you can buy a unique digital pointer to a physical work of art that does not exist. You can prove your exclusive ownership of the absence of a work of art. Great! The possibilities are dizzying. First, I have an incredibly amazing Ban—no, not a Banksy, I have an incredibly amazing lost masterpiece of Michelangelo here in my living room but unfortunately I lit it on fire. I tried to record a video of it burning but I pushed the wrong button on my phone, so there’s no video. I did succeed, however, in converting this rare and now permanently lost masterpiece into an NFT on the blockchain, and I will now sell it to you. It was a picture of a cat, if that helps.
Second, I am going to sell a token that does not entitle you to ownership of the Mona Lisa. You can prove, on the blockchain, that you do not own the Mona Lisa, and that no one else does not own it in the unique way that you do not own it. I am going to record a video of me walking into the Louvre, and then walking out again half an hour later, and saying to the camera “yup the Mona Lisa is in there and I definitely do not have it.” And then sell a token of … that whole thing. Why not.
Third, I am going to download the YouTube video of them burning that Banksy, then I am going to delete the YouTube video, and then I am going to sell a token giving you ownership to the deleted video.
Fourth, I am going to sell tokens proving ownership, on the blockchain, of the same Banksy painting that they destroyed. Prove me wrong! You buy a token from Injective Protocol proving that you own that Banksy; your friend buys a token from me proving that she owns that Banksy. You say “no I own the real one.” Your friend says “okay then go redeem your token for the painting.” You’re like “well they burnt the painting.” I think you lose this argument! But what do I know about art.
Elsewhere Jack Dorsey is selling his first tweet as an NFT, sure. We’re so close to a good idea here; what we need is for Dorsey to shut down Twitter and then sell an NFT of that.

[mushi]

A new way for cryptocurrency owners to develop their virtual money speculating on virtual images.

Nothing to do with art here.

Seeing artists getting interested into NFT is only reflecting their lack of thought into what 'art' really means. It's a true commitment, body and soul, not an upload of a virtual image.

All of this make me remember a piece of art that made me smile at the time stating this : I spent all my bitcoins on air guitar course.

[Skizz 82]

Nice 3ply paper 33g

[collectorspain]

Hello, I want to buy this pixel art image of sesame street and companion kaws:
Link
But I don't know how to do it or how much it is worth. Can anyone explain to me? I am new to this and I want to buy it

[kjg]

Mar 9, 2021 9:41:28 GMT 1 collectorspain said:

Hello, I want to buy this pixel art image of sesame street and companion kaws:
Link
But I don't know how to do it or how much it is worth. Can anyone explain to me? I am new to this and I want to buy it

It is pretty straight forward, isn't it?

[Lee Ellis Art]

Mar 8, 2021 18:25:03 GMT 1 kuni said:

Mar 8, 2021 17:33:28 GMT 1 Lee Ellis Art said:

Ha ha, brave admission. 
I can't see any harm in dabbling at this stage, especially in artists you already like. After all you buy what you like and it supports (as far as I'm aware) the artists and allows then to create more physical works. There are a lot of awful pieces out there though. I don't understand the vast majority and those particular pieces I can't see having any longevity at all. The rest though I imagine will be held in high esteem. What sites do you use? I'm trialling rarible. 

Agree the vast majority of the art on all of these platforms is rubbish and will be swept into the dustbin of history sooner rather than later. I think you're seeing a pretty low bar for what people are willing to purchase that should likely move towards higher and higher quality as more legit artists get into the space. For example, when Invader or Nava drop an NFT and it's $5k, it's going to make it a lot harder to justify spending $5k on Steve Nobodyface. There's also a massive discrepancy between physical and NFT that has to work itself out - people paying $200k for a 1/1 NFT when the artist sells a large canvas for $15k. 

It's been eye opening to talk to digital natives in their twenties who would actually take a NFT over the physical equivalent. We can talk shit about it all we want, and i personally think it's ridiculous, but there are a lot of people out there for who this is the case. They don't have physical walls to display the work or their digital identity is more important to them than their physical. It's a wild dynamic that's easy to disregard that I'm trying to understand. 

I've bought on niftygateway and open sea. I feel like superrare is where most of my favorite artists are setting up shop though, but haven't managed to purchase anything i've offered on. There are a fair # of the artists that many of us collect releasing NFT's.

There's a lot of price discovery going on so I want a little exposure to the space but not enough to make a difference if/when it implodes. i'm trying to take it slow and learn as much as i can about it. 

I agree that super rare seems to be where the better artists are. There's some interesting work around. The pricing is insane. I don't get understand how things are valued in this space. Part of me wonders if people are chancing it, can't be bothered to type in all the '0.000003354647' numbers or that fact the currency is so volatile that people are keeping it high in the expectation prices will drop. I'm a week in an still none the wiser. 

[collectorspain]

Mar 9, 2021 9:59:11 GMT 1 kjg said:

Mar 9, 2021 9:41:28 GMT 1 collectorspain said:

Hello, I want to buy this pixel art image of sesame street and companion kaws:
Link
But I don't know how to do it or how much it is worth. Can anyone explain to me? I am new to this and I want to buy it

Or maybe you just want to generate some traffic and push your own sale?

Hello,
Thanks for the answer, I am new to this and I want to know how wallets work. I am interested in buying that art, but I do not have an account in any wallet yet

[kjg]

Mar 9, 2021 10:02:01 GMT 1 collectorspain said:

Mar 9, 2021 9:59:11 GMT 1 kjg said:

Or maybe you just want to generate some traffic and push your own sale?

Hello,
Thanks for the answer, I am new to this and I want to know how wallets work. I am interested in buying that art, but I do not have an account in any wallet yet

OK. Check out ethereum.org/en/eth/ and ethereum.org/en/get-eth/ for some more info.

[Lee Ellis Art]

Mar 9, 2021 10:02:01 GMT 1 collectorspain said:

Mar 9, 2021 9:59:11 GMT 1 kjg said:

Or maybe you just want to generate some traffic and push your own sale?

Hello,
Thanks for the answer, I am new to this and I want to know how wallets work. I am interested in buying that art, but I do not have an account in any wallet yet

There are lots of different wallets and not all link up to the various sites.
I use coinable wallet and have attached it to rarible. I think it was said already, but Metamask works with Opensea. Not sure on sites such as Superrare though. 

[rungsp]

Hand torn edges on the paper?

What do people think...go for a float mount?

[rockbeer]

Mar 4, 2021 21:30:42 GMT 1 Lord Lucas Roham said:

What do you actually get?

This is the key question. Apparently, in some cases at least, what you actually get is the knowledge that you, and you alone, 'own' a digital artefact that can be freely viewed, retained, redistributed, and potentially even resold (via subsequently-minted NFTs) by unlimited numbers of other people.

This whole thing is madness. I predict copyright carnage.

I think what you really get when you strip away all the bs is the knowledge that an entry exists in a distributed leger confirming that at some point you gave someone some amount of digital currency in exchange for an idea of 'ownership' that exists exclusively in your own mind.

It kind of reminds me of www.moonestates.com/

[Lee Ellis Art]

Mar 9, 2021 11:06:38 GMT 1 rockbeer said:

Mar 4, 2021 21:30:42 GMT 1 Lord Lucas Roham said:

What do you actually get?

This is the key question. Apparently, in some cases at least, what you actually get is the knowledge that you, and you alone, 'own' a digital artefact that can be freely viewed, retained, redistributed, and potentially even resold (via subsequently-minted NFTs) by unlimited numbers of other people.

This whole thing is madness. I predict copyright carnage.

I think what you really get when you strip away all the bs is the knowledge that an entry exists in a distributed leger confirming that at some point you gave someone some amount of digital currency in exchange for an idea of 'ownership' that exists exclusively in your own mind.

It kind of reminds me of www.moonestates.com/

It's a mad concept. The moon estates example is pretty accurate. 
Some artists do however, send you physical pieces (although this isn't as common as you'd hope). It depends on the artist and if they're a) any good b) legit and are making a career as an artist c) have created a physical item. As mentioned before, there is a lot of awful work on there. 

[rockbeer]

Mar 9, 2021 11:13:07 GMT 1 Lee Ellis Art said:

Mar 9, 2021 11:06:38 GMT 1 rockbeer said:

This is the key question. Apparently, in some cases at least, what you actually get is the knowledge that you, and you alone, 'own' a digital artefact that can be freely viewed, retained, redistributed, and potentially even resold (via subsequently-minted NFTs) by unlimited numbers of other people.

This whole thing is madness. I predict copyright carnage.

I think what you really get when you strip away all the bs is the knowledge that an entry exists in a distributed leger confirming that at some point you gave someone some amount of digital currency in exchange for an idea of 'ownership' that exists exclusively in your own mind.

It kind of reminds me of www.moonestates.com/

It's a mad concept. The moon estates example is pretty accurate. 
Some artists do however, send you physical pieces (although this isn't as common as you'd hope). It depends on the artist and if they're a) any good b) legit and are making a career as an artist c) have created a physical item. As mentioned before, there is a lot of awful work on there. 

Indeed - and this is an interesting and important distinction.

I tend to agree. I think there's huge mileage and value in using blockchain tech as a proof of ownership of an actual physical item. A digital, unforgeable COA, if you will.

As for exclusively digital work, well I do get that there is a problem with trying to assign ownership to items of which unlimited identical copies can be freely produced. I think blockchain could be the answer. I can't help thinking that selling 'ownership' of tweets and football touchdowns undermines the credibility of the proposition and makes the whole thing look like a money-grab.