Andy Warhol, silkscreen "Mao"

[Евгений]

A bit of history.
---------------------------
At auction Christie `s in New York," Mao "by Andy Warhol sold for $ 17.4 million (2006)
Portrait of the Chinese communist leader Mao Zedong American pop artist Andy Warhol did in the early 1970's, when China lifted its Iron Curtain. American newspapers were filled with pictures of Mao - and Warhol, who never missed a sign of mass culture (be it a bank's canned soup or a photo of Marilyn Monroe), made a series of ten copyright silkscreen "Mao". Then there were the "Lenin" and "Hammer and Sickle." Portrait of Mao bought a Hong Kong billionaire, executive director of Chinese Estates Holding, Joseph Lau.
-----------------------------------------------
Interesting for three years, prices have risen?
Silkscreen is The Draw products .. and the prices.

[Seriy]

One giant Mao I saw in a museum in Berlin.

[Евгений]

Seriy, is difficult to understand the pricing for this rabotu.Zhivopis understandable, but silkscreen ..

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Eugene

made a series of ten Copyright silk"Mao".

Copyright silkscreen.
He simply chose this technique.

[Евгений]

Workshop contemporary artist

Сообщение от LCR

As part of their search for ways to blur the boundary between the original and copy, Warhol began to paint a portrait of Mao, stiliziruya features of his face. Then, according to his instructions, one of his assistants made a series of 300 copies of each of which was made with the previous one.
Examining the results, Warhol remarked that his Copy center machine equipped with a protective system against falsification of documents, this system was that each successive copy has risen by a fraction of a percent. Thus, the machine changed the face of Mao, which with the increase of circulation became more abstract. Thus was obtained a series of three hundred copies of unique, in the establishment where the machine replaced the artist.
This was the crowning work of the creative process, typical for Warhol from the very beginning of his activities - his first works were created either by using stamps and stencils, or on-line coloring sessions, in which each of the participants - friends of the artist - impose only one color. Since 1962, he was drawn to the technique of industrial screen printing, used them to create portraits of Marilyn.
To create custom portraits after 1968, he first makes Polaroids model, crop and process them, and then increased and was about to transfer to the screen printing. This transfer was carried out as an assistant, which is painting the colored zone portrait - skin, hair, eyes, clothing.

Interestingly, The Draw work, labor, blacks, and the cost reaches $ 17.4 million .. paradox.
LCR, I read again, thank you ...

[Vladimir]

For Warhol is a specific mathematical statistics. And unlike many artists fairly reliable, because a year is a lot of transactions and activities on the market very much.
So: the price index for the lottery graphics Ulohola the French technique in the period 2006-2008 was + 109%. That is, sub-$ 100 turned into 209 dollars. And for the period 2008-2009. chart shows the index down 61%. Specify that the schedule on their terms - it Prints - Paper prints. A silk and mixed techniques are the category Painting. The situation is slightly different: 2006-2008. = + 145%, and 2008-2009 - minus 48%. This is the starting point. In answer to your question you have to remember that Mao was bought on courage, with a huge overpayment. These purchases do not fit the statistics, and perhaps finding a buyer without a discount in the coming years will be difficult.

[Seriy]

Vladimir, I recently stumbled on your and other people's reviews of investment in sovrisk in the early 2000's in the journal "Director" (? Possibly wrong with the called). Prices as from another planet. American abstraktekspressionisty first row of ten thousand dollars.
It is interesting to compare the then and present your evaluation results.

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Seriy

Vladimir, I recently stumbled on your and other people's reviews of investment in sovrisk in the early 2000's in the journal "Director" (? Possibly wrong with the called). Prices as from another planet. American abstraktekspressionisty first row of ten thousand dollars.

Yes, then in "The Director-info" was the heading "Investing in Art" and a series of articles about investing in direction. I do not know what kind of review you caught. But then there were still a rarity: and Harring and Basquiat, and Kondo. But since then much water has flowed under the bridge. Basquiat has risen in price again at 8. For all the first names have statistics - this market is very underdeveloped.

Added after 8 minutes

Сообщение от Eugene

Volodya facts tell a different story ... Here's the events that have occurred after the record sales (2006.)

In the year sold at auction hundreds of works by Warhol. And only very few are sold for tens of millions. Can only compare the same sales of comparable quality things (with Warhol is not difficult). What are we arguing? Can I sell to Mao, which was bought for 17 million three years ago today that 34 million? Or 50? Theoretically possible. If someone strongly feel an urge. But it will not be an investment decision, and emotional. A wise Chinese man sit by the river to wait for when his pripyvet other "Mao"

[Евгений]

Сообщение от Vladimir

What are we arguing?

Volodya, I do not argue .. Silk went for 44 million (2009) record is growing .. see what happens in 2010 ..
Can not understand both mass production is of such amounts ..

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Eugene

I just can not understand both mass production is of such amounts ..

Probably I should stop paying attention to such things. Warhol because it is taught. It was not always how it is done, and what has been done - an important idea, not its technical implementation. Actually Circulation, repeatability, mass, technology - and they were among the key chips Warhol. Collectors are not fools. They look at the 20 century and see a few major innovators: Picasso, Kandinsky, Malevich, Warhol - the people who formed a trend.