Single feature ranking

[Wladzislaw]

Samvel,


I meant other work M. Danzig, called it "Minsk. Winter" estimate was 23,000 - $ 25,000.

[Ольга Озолина]

Сообщение от Wladzislaw

Samvel,

I meant other work M. Danzig, called it "Minsk. Winter" estimate was 23 000 - 25 000 $.

I will say as a private person: IMHO, Danzig is absolutely on the spot. However, if there are objections, I'll pass.

And where you can see the avant-garde work Maliszewski? Of course, I will convey to the RC, but so far, IMHO, he Basov was not even close "Maybe that's why him and gave 4A, because our experts at knew about his interesting and avant-garde works and did not give a 3B, and up to 3A, he did not reach?

This is all my opinion! In the end, I am entitled to it or not?

[Wladzislaw]

Сообщение от Olga Ozolina; 1314161"

And where you can see the avant-garde work Maliszewski?

Made a separate topic dedicated to Algerdu Maliszewski.

Added after 2 minutes

Сообщение от Olga Ozolina; 1314161"

IMHO, Danzig is absolutely on the spot. However, if there are objections, I'll pass.

By Danzig is no objection, there are objections to Savitsky ↓.

By the way, Basov is not the best job. Only, as far as I understand it, which in Soviet times has been reproduced in a publication.

[Ольга Озолина]

Сообщение от Wladzislaw

According to Danzig being no objection, there are objections to the Savitsky ↓.

The father, son or Michael Andreevich?



And for the excellent work Maliszewski thanks a lot.
Let us think.

[DSF]

You see, I'm on my first higher education had a direct bearing on preparation of different catalogs, ratings, lists, directories, etc. I know how they need to do. The first - each rating should be a clear target audience. The second - a must be based on at least one formal principle, a kind of objective information that can "feel". This information should be important especially for the target audience. The basis of rating "artfakt" lie auction sale, quantity and price. The target audience - buyers and sellers. Naturally this rating you will not find a Vermeer, it there and can not be, it there and no one is looking. How true wrote fabosch - «it is absolutely correct and necessary instrument of a practical nature". Now imagine that you have 50,000 artists and you need to evaluate their "level of intentions, expressed in art," art history to give an assessment. " Just do not tell tales that sit "Spices", and consider each candidate on the list. Can you imagine how many man-hours it would take? Even if we assume that there is a base with the works and biographies of all the 50000? But such a base there. Yes, and every year it's all review it again? Therefore need a formal principle. Which, Olga Ozolin, I ask? And I respond: "For ethical reasons, the work of the Rating center is closed, the information on its progress, and sources of awareness among the Rating center not recorded, were not disclosed and will not be published. What is this "terrible burzhuinsky secret? "And why it needs to be hidden?
"Why the West is no such ratings? Yes, because professionals do not engage in such nonsense, it means putting an end to his biography.
I personally have nothing against this rating does not mean someone uses it, so be it. I - for their professionalism in any business. This rating is - just unprofessional. But, bezrybe, as they say ...

[Ольга Озолина]

Сообщение от DSF

therefore need a formal principle. Which, Olga Ozolin, I ask? And I respond: "For ethical reasons, the work of the Rating center is closed, the information on its progress, and sources of awareness among the Rating center not recorded, were not disclosed and will not be published. What is this "terrible burzhuinsky secret? "And why it needs to be hidden?
"Why the West is no such ratings? Yes, because professionals do not engage in such nonsense, it means putting an end to his biography.
I personally have nothing against this rating does not mean someone uses it, so be it. I - for their professionalism in any business. This rating is - just unprofessional. But, bezrybe, as they say ...

Formal principle of EXP, of course, there has been developed more than 10 years ago, and it is fairly standard for heuristic evaluations in general:
http://forum.artinvestment.ru/newrep...eply&p=1314241

Closed is its concrete realization. And in vain do you think it's from lack of professionalism. Who are you going to blame him - Cantor Meylanda, ZAGRAEVSKY or deceased Martynov?
 
Just in such a difficult and delicate matter as the ratings of many thousands of living artists with their ambitions, otherwise not. We are all human beings, and the extra scenes and insults us absolutely nowhere.

[mihailovoh]

DSF,

* Personally, I have nothing against this rating does not mean someone uses it, and let *. There is no other easy.

Rating is targeted at a broad audience lyubiteley.Professionaly and without access to informatsii.hotya often refer to this rating when advantageous.

[Люси]

Сообщение от mihailovoh

I personally have nothing against this rating does not mean someone uses it, and let *. There is no other easy.

Сообщение от mihailovoh

Professionals and without access to informatsii.hotya often refer to this rating when advantageous

Totally with you soglasna.Ya itself when it applied in the absence of information on the artist, to a rating .. Now I looked into it very rarely .. but sometimes it is useful ..
It is clear that the rating is made by people and like any top with so many artists .. he can not be entirely adequate, and so that everyone was happy ... is impossible in principle ..

In principle, I think I should say thanks to its founders for what it is, at least what is .. that is often offered to purchase the artist, and no informations on it, .. and rating see if n.h, he's on the list is , years of life are written, etc etc.