How does an untrained artist who has never sold his art command prices higher than a Picasso?

[FreeinChrist]

A signed Picasso for $400,000? It couldn't be for a large or medium sized painting.

Picasso's portrait of a young lover to sell for $55 million at auction

Picasso Painting Breaks Record at 179.4 Million Dollars at Auction - JerrysArtarama.com

Picasso's painting sells for $103 Million after 19 minutes of biding at Christie's

Picasso masterpiece sells for $51 million in London

Picasso's artworks auctioned for more than $100 million | tellerreport.com

Muse and still lifes: more than 108 million dollars for the Picasso sale organized in Las Vegas


It is possible to get a Picasso at $400,000 or less but those are usually watercolors or rough sketches of an idea or some of his potteryware.


If folks want to buy one of Hunter Biden's paintings (range $75,000 for works on paper - $500,000 for larger works), that is their choice.

I have to point the incredible hypocrisy of some on the right complaining about Hunter selling his artwork and not working at the White House, when Trump's kids made plenty of outside money while supposedly working at the White House:


https://www.citizensforethics.org/r...ka-made-up-to-640-million-in-the-white-house/

Just a month before her father was elected president, Russia renewed two trademarks for Ivanka Trump’s business. This would be the start of a pattern. In 2017, Ivanka’s business won preliminary approval for three Chinese trademarks on the same day that she dined with Chinese President Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago. In May 2018, Ivanka’s business was awarded “registration” approval from the Chinese government for five trademark applications, with an additional one getting “first trial approval.” The same week, President Trump announced he would try to save jobs at ZTE, the Chinese telecommunications giant closely tied to the government. A month later, Ivanka’s business got registration approval for three more Chinese trademarks, on the same day her father announced he’d lift sanctions against ZTE.

Ivanka’s business applied for Japanese trademarks the day after her father won the presidency. They were approved around the time of Mike Pence’s visit to Japan where he met with then-Prime Minister Abe. Ivanka also met with Abe, along with her father, about a week after her company applied for the trademarks. She won approval for additional Japanese trademarks in 2017.

In what would become the defining scandal of her time in office, in October 2018 Ivanka’s brand won 16 new trademarks from the Chinese government, including for voting machines. These approvals came about three months after Ivanka announced that her brand was shutting down, and mark the largest number of new Chinese trademarks she received in a single month during the Trump presidency. Six months after the company officially shut down, it received a new trademark to sell the Ivanka brand in Canada. In all, CREW found at least 28 foreign trademarks approved for Ivanka Trump while in the White House.

 

[FreeinChrist]

Some of his artwork is interesting.

A self portrait:

from the LA art opening he had:

 

[Bradskii]

Obviously it's because his connections....

While most "modern art" is garbage (just my opinion, I'm no "art expert")....

There's a Museum of Contemporary Art in Sydney - opposite the Opera House. I worked as a site manager on the refurbishment of the building about 25 years back. And around 4 years ago I called in one afternoon for a browse. There was an exhibition of German modern art. Some of it a little head scratching. But hey, each to his own. And in one room I saw on the opposite wall a painting of some ductwork and pipes and cables which looked like the wall had been cut open and you could see the services behind. A trompe l'oeil. Quite neat I thought. And as I walked towards it it became more realistic. Until I realised it that it was a hole in the wall to access the services behind. Maybe a leaking pipe.

OK, I felt a bit stupid. But I poked my head inside to check the services with an experienced eye. And then noticed a small plaque alongside the hole that all the exhibits had, giving the title and some background of the particular artist. And the title was something like 'Loch in der Wand'. And then I realised with even greater embarresment that the artist had been the one who cut the hole and this was his piece of art.

I treated everything else from then on with some caution. Is this really the toilet door or another artistic comment?

 

[Desk trauma]

There's a Museum of Contemporary Art in Sydney - opposite the Opera House. I worked as a site manager on the refurbishment of the building about 25 years back. And around 4 years ago I called in one afternoon for a browse. There was an exhibition of German modern art. Some of it a little head scratching. But hey, each to his own. And in one room I saw on the opposite wall a painting of some ductwork and pipes and cables which looked like the wall had been cut open and you could see the services behind. A trompe l'oeil. Quite neat I thought. And as I walked towards it it became more realistic. Until I realised it that it was a hole in the wall to access the services behind. Maybe a leaking pipe.

OK, I felt a bit stupid. But I poked my head inside to check the services with an experienced eye. And then noticed a small plaque alongside the hole that all the exhibits had, giving the title and some background of the particular artist. And the title was something like 'Loch in der Wand'. And then I realised with even greater embarresment that the artist had been the one who cut the hole and this was his piece of art.

I treated everything else from then on with some caution. Is this really the toilet door or another artistic comment?

The conclusion that I came to with "modern art" and architecture some time ago is that to me it's the script of a language I do not speak and whos alphabet I do not know. I can tell that the artist is attempting to communicate something, the form of the words can be pleasing to my eye but the content is outside my understanding.

 

[Sunshinee777]

Some of his artwork is interesting.

A self portrait:

View attachment 307765


View attachment 307766



from the LA art opening he had:

View attachment 307767

Absolutely stunning.

 

[hislegacy]

It is possible to get a Picasso at $400,000 or less

QFT - and does not disprove the OP

I have to point the incredible hypocrisy of some on the right complaining about Hunter selling his artwork and not working at the White House, when Trump's kids made plenty of outside money while supposedly working at the White House:

But Trump is just is not a great debating tactic.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Hunter Biden's paintings pricier than Picasso's: Devine - Washington News Post

“You can buy a Picasso, a signed Picasso, for $400,000, which is cheaper than Hunter Biden’s $500,000 paintings,” she said. “So I think possibly that the people who are paying insane prices for Hunter Biden paintings are not really doing it for the art.”​

Answer - his last name is Biden.

Discuss

Seems this complex piece is worth the asking price. I dont belive it is sold.

 

[anna ~ grace]

Some of Picasso’s early work was absolutely beautiful.

Imho the longer he painted, the uglier and cruder his work became.

 

[anna ~ grace]

Here are some of Biden’s paintings;

Imho, he’s quite good. I like abstract expressionism, and this kind of blurs the line between realism and abstraction. I think it’s pretty cool. He couldn’t paint that if he didn’t have talent.

 

[Yttrium]

Hmm. Those paintings are pretty good. I like them better than Picasso's. I wouldn't buy any of them, but a cheap print might be nice.

 

[FreeinChrist]

QFT - and does not disprove the OP



But Trump is just is not a great debating tactic.

It is only the large pieces by Biden that get the $500,000.
Most is not that much at all.

A fair comparison would be comparing equally large size canvas paintings by each, which the top number for Biden is $500,000 compared to Picasso getting multi-millions.

 

[Vylo]

Hmm. Those paintings are pretty good. I like them better than Picasso's. I wouldn't buy any of them, but a cheap print might be nice.

I prefer the Picassos, but at least Hunter is making decent/good art, not just dropping a blob of paint on a canvas and calling it "the color of his dreams" like this garbage:

https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/492701

This guy (Joan Miro) has had paintings sell for millions and yet anyone's child can literally do better.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Some of his artwork is interesting.

A self portrait:

View attachment 307765


View attachment 307766



from the LA art opening he had:

View attachment 307767

Doesn’t look so ‘untrained’ to me.

 

[rjs330]

I think Biden shows some talent for sure. Even if I don't like that kind of art.

And who am I to say he shouldn't get that much for a painting. If I am a true capitalist I say if people want to pay that much for it, who am I to criticize?

It's interesting though that so many on the left would support these exorbitant costs making Biden wealthy, while totally excoriating any other rich people who made their money by their hard work.

 

[Whyayeman]

Where can I buy a Picasso for $400,000?

 

[Whyayeman]

Anybody can offer a work for $500,000. The Washington Post story does not report whether anyone has actually paid that much.

 

[hislegacy]

It is only the large pieces by Biden that get the $500,000.
Most is not that much at all.

A fair comparison would be comparing equally large size canvas paintings by each, which the top number for Biden is $500,000 compared to Picasso getting multi-millions.

Not accurate at all in the art world (now that we are now all art professionals), size does not equate to price.

 

[Whyayeman]

Not accurate at all in the art world (now that we are now all art professionals), size does not equate to price.

Not entirely, I agree. But a large work by a major artist is likely to be more expensive than a small one by the same person.

The Washington Post is comparing apples and oranges in that article.

 

[Whyayeman]

Some of Picasso’s early work was absolutely beautiful.

Imho the longer he painted, the uglier and cruder his work became.

These two works were completed when Picasso was a teenager. The First Communion was accepted by the Spanish Academy when he was fifteen. I agree that it is impressively well painted; I have seen it in situ in Barcelona. What is evident in the original and rather less so in this reproduction is the incipient anti-clericism which developed throughout his early work. The priest and altar-boy portray a guilty lust for the praying girl - which may have been shared by the artist...

It is also a show-off picture in the manner of the Dutch masters with passages of superb skill presenting subtly the textures of the fabrics of the altar and the white communion dress. I could go on.

 

[d taylor]

But that would exclude works by people like Munch and Bosch. I think Hawthorne's view is somewhat naive.

Well even though they have their place in the history of art, their works will not be considered as examples of the highest products of human art.

Munch is basically known for one painting