What a WONDERFUL Discourse! Mme Ragai is such an engaging speaker. And who would have thought that there was so much physics involved in forgery detection!
The experiment with scanning brain activity while being told about a Rembrandt... Did they just do as described or were there all combinations and permutations of forged paintings and authentic paintings and being told the painting was forged and told the painting was authentic? If not, the study was a bit of a waste of time scientifically speaking. Time well spent if they just wanted to reinforce a hypothesis that authentic paintings give more pleasure than forgeries. Does anyone know more about that study?
No, Einstein was still right; that experiment only "proved" where the *paint* was _likely_ to have come from, it didn't really prove _who_ *painted* it. At most, if they'd managed to find Vermeer's DNA on the painting, it would have strongly suggested that he'd been in its presence (though even that could have been faked).
Art is in the eye of the beholder. Not who prints it. Art is an individuals interpretation of what they like. Street artists are talented. And can put out Art quickly. Elites don't have a monopoly on art. The vase sells for 20 dollars and 5 dollars. When the child asked why the same vase was two different prices. The proprietor said some people like to pay more, which makes the vase more valuable.
Well that's part of it, a huge part of it, but there's always exceptions. Something that takes more time to create isn't inherently better, but if it is something you enjoy and want time should at least be partially considered. Something that takes over a hundred hours, or even over a thousand hours, typically will have a higher ceiling of quality. Doesn't mean it hits that ceiling but it exists. Or with reproduction and cheap quality may be adequate for the average person, or just exist in a capacity that suits someone but then it's trying to capitalize on selling more for less - meaning the original design isn't actually worth less even if at the point of sale people are paying less. Which means commonality and novelty are also other factors among various others.
You don’t have to look far. There are bunch of assholes on eBay selling art signed by famous artists usually sell for 70$ unframed. claiming they found in their attic. The problem is Museums don’t care they buy that stuff to put it up authentic or not. People also buy them based on “what if” risk
Would a painting of a red and green triangle be worth more? What if it had three pink circles? What if it had eight million blue rectangles? Please, Mr. Art Critic, enlighten us about the relationship between the number & colour of geometric shapes and monetary value...
Chaotic presentation and putting spectrum analysis without explanation what is going on, hmm. Obviously is a world expert but the presentation needs more structure. And some of the slides are straight from a dry physics lecture at uni.
Should probably have focused just on 2 or 3 paintings and the techniques used on those, instead of trying to cover 7 or 8 different techniques in a relatively short lecture. I suspect someone from the RI asked her to "make sure to mention the science".
What a WONDERFUL Discourse!
Mme Ragai is such an engaging speaker. And who would have thought that there was so much physics involved in forgery detection!
Thanks RI for always having interesting and amazing speakers.
Fantastic talk. She is a great speaker!
So, what he found was a load of pollocks ;-)
A load of OLD pollocks!
I enjoyed that!
The experiment with scanning brain activity while being told about a Rembrandt... Did they just do as described or were there all combinations and permutations of forged paintings and authentic paintings and being told the painting was forged and told the painting was authentic? If not, the study was a bit of a waste of time scientifically speaking. Time well spent if they just wanted to reinforce a hypothesis that authentic paintings give more pleasure than forgeries.
Does anyone know more about that study?
No, Einstein was still right; that experiment only "proved" where the *paint* was _likely_ to have come from, it didn't really prove _who_ *painted* it. At most, if they'd managed to find Vermeer's DNA on the painting, it would have strongly suggested that he'd been in its presence (though even that could have been faked).
Fascinating
Art is in the eye of the beholder. Not who prints it. Art is an individuals interpretation of what they like. Street artists are talented. And can put out Art quickly. Elites don't have a monopoly on art. The vase sells for 20 dollars and 5 dollars. When the child asked why the same vase was two different prices. The proprietor said some people like to pay more, which makes the vase more valuable.
Well that's part of it, a huge part of it, but there's always exceptions. Something that takes more time to create isn't inherently better, but if it is something you enjoy and want time should at least be partially considered. Something that takes over a hundred hours, or even over a thousand hours, typically will have a higher ceiling of quality. Doesn't mean it hits that ceiling but it exists. Or with reproduction and cheap quality may be adequate for the average person, or just exist in a capacity that suits someone but then it's trying to capitalize on selling more for less - meaning the original design isn't actually worth less even if at the point of sale people are paying less. Which means commonality and novelty are also other factors among various others.
You don’t have to look far. There are bunch of assholes on eBay selling art signed by famous artists usually sell for 70$ unframed. claiming they found in their attic. The problem is Museums don’t care they buy that stuff to put it up authentic or not. People also buy them based on “what if” risk
Now I highly doubt that assessment about art becoming a commodity was by an anonymous person.
You do know "anonymous" doesn't mean the person actually _has no name,_ right? It just means it wasn't signed.
I'm not convinced you can "forge" Jackson Pollock.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, does everything a duck can do. Who cares it's not a duck?
Better to cook the duck, then taste it.
@johnstewartrichards5922 and tastes like a duck....it's only when one finds out it wasn't a duck that the trouble starts, but until that point?
Ferrari Red if you please. Ahaaa!
8 million on a paint. See, rich are people are stupid too.
First world problem, isn't it?😱
hi
Any idiot who pays 3+ million for a painting of a black and red square has been ripped off whether it is a forgery or not.
Would a painting of a red and green triangle be worth more? What if it had three pink circles? What if it had eight million blue rectangles? Please, Mr. Art Critic, enlighten us about the relationship between the number & colour of geometric shapes and monetary value...
Greed always feeds the swindlers.
Chaotic presentation and putting spectrum analysis without explanation what is going on, hmm. Obviously is a world expert but the presentation needs more structure. And some of the slides are straight from a dry physics lecture at uni.
Yeah it took me a bit to figure out
Should probably have focused just on 2 or 3 paintings and the techniques used on those, instead of trying to cover 7 or 8 different techniques in a relatively short lecture. I suspect someone from the RI asked her to "make sure to mention the science".