This one "Number 17A" sold in 2016 for $200m.
But then, on the other hand, you have a painter like Mark Rothko (1903-70) Large paintings $25m+.
Which would you prefer? Remember, art is in the eye of the beholder!
This one "Number 17A" sold in 2016 for $200m.
But then, on the other hand, you have a painter like Mark Rothko (1903-70) Large paintings $25m+.
Which would you prefer? Remember, art is in the eye of the beholder!
My garage floor looks like that. It’s detracts from the value of my home.
There are some nice Pollocks. That's not one of them.
The Rothko would add a burst of colors to a room.
Paying large sums of money for either isn't about appreciating art. It's an investment for the rich.
Does anyone believe they're beautiful art? Not really.
At this level the rich pay top dollar hoping they can resell at a profit in a few years.
That's pretty much why art dealers hype artists. Supply/demand, dead artist/limited supply.
It's not art appreciation. It's gambling on a payoff.
If it looks nice and adds color to the room, that's just a minor plus.