Simon Faibisovich, the exhibition "Evidence" on Gogol Boulevard, 10

[Posav]

Сообщение от SAH

The facts are hard currency

But all this financial and monetary chimeras nothing to do with the present value of his work. You all, a clear majority of professional artists will say that these sharks and skull-lime nonsense. But we, after all fake. The value of linden dollars, too. Someone has their bags and do not know what to do with them. And buy inflated Ponte.

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

I never claimed that Surikov will cost more Malevich. Why do you ascribe to me what I said?

Course, Malevich will always cost more, but this Surikov is no less an artist than he really is! You are wrong to highlight key points. Shishkin, Surikov, Malevich and Kandinsky - this berry one field, they are all true artists who worked at different times and in different paradigms. Absolutely unprofessional compared Surikov and Malevich! I equally enjoy and one another. It's like day and night, every time of day has its own peculiarities, but one thing is impossible without the other!

You all understand. Why this confusion? Surikov Malevich - a metaphor for anything you are not attributed. I do not compare hudozhikov, not their creative potential and the degree of undervaluation. I'm talking about the price of their work. At price levels. And this is quite comparable. As for art: fine, if the buyer knows the hours that such a tourbillon. But not necessarily know the difference Mechanics Seiko up any Vacheron Contantin, to accept the fact that the latter several orders of magnitude more expensive. I understand the rules of the game - why such a difference in price, given that the precision of the two hours about the same. Yes, and this is also a metaphor.

It is a pity that the theme about Faibisovich again jumped on the role of Hirst's in art history.

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Vladimir

You all understand. Why this confusion? Surikov Malevich - a metaphor for anything you are not attributed. I do not compare hudozhikov, not their creative potential and the degree of undervaluation. I'm talking about the price of their work. At price levels. And this is quite comparable. As for art: fine, if the buyer knows the hours that such a tourbillon. But not necessarily know the difference Mechanics Seiko up any Vacheron Contantin, to accept the fact that the latter several orders of magnitude more expensive. I understand the rules of the game - why such a difference in price, given that the precision of the two hours about the same. Yes, and this is also a metaphor.

Vladimir, I'm sorry, but your position is pure snobbery. Clearly, such an approach to investing in art has a place to be. But it is fundamentally wrong and is cultivated by large players such as hedge funds and large artdilery (http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showpo...5&postcount=11). Everyone understands that the pyramid will collapse sooner or later, but everyone hopes that he can pull out their money. I'm talking about an objective approach (as possible) to determine the quality of art. Why investing in old masters are much less risky than in contemporary art? Because these items have long been dispersed to private collections, and this very fact makes it impossible and pointless so-called "promotion" name of the application of all existing at the moment "tools." And two important moment of determining the reliability of the old investment masterov.Vo First, they are many times bought and sold, but because demand for them is not efimeren, but real, as evidenced by century-old practice of sales. Secondly, what emerges from the first, or vice versa, the objects of the old art of high quality rarely come on the market.

Of course, no small importance is the fact that the old masters have long taken their place in art history.

Of course, you can buy art, not figuring in it, but it is devoid of any pleasure, and inevitably leads to the ingress of money in the future. In this case, you need to buy for fun (that would not sozhelet Lost ivistitsiyah). But what is fun, if you do not understand what you're doing? That's all full circle ...

Perhaps that is why art buyers only 2%? But of this I have written in this thread above: http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showpo...1&postcount=50

[artcol]

Сообщение от Vladimir

It is a pity that the theme about Faibisovich again jumped on the role of Hirst's in the history of art.

Indeed, sorry
Where can the maximum extent familiar with his work, not to be hasty in the estimates? I think I rushed about "no integrity" - he is just a series all.

[AlexanderG]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

Course, Malevich will always cost more,

Etogo ne znaet nikto.

Navernoe v iskusstve vy i razbiraetes ', no sudia po poslednim postam, v mehanizmah raboty rynka vy ponimaete ne ochen'.

Clearly, such an approach to investing in art has a place to be. But it is fundamentally wrong and is cultivated by large players such as hedge funds and large artdilery (http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showpo...5&postcount=11).

Investitsii v iskusstvo prakticheski ne suschestvuet. Den'gi na etom delaiut edinitsy.

Читать дальше... 

Money should not be paid for humanities. Eto vsio ravno, chto obsuzdat 'zarabotki vrachei, uchitelei i drugih gumanitariev.

Vse investitsii dvizimy krupnymi igrokami, esli vy ne krupnyi igrok, to idiote pritsepom. Ot vas nichego ne zavisit. Ugadaete dvizenie krupnogo igroka - vyigraete,

Everyone understands that the pyramid will collapse sooner or later, but everyone hopes that he can pull out their money.

Esli by vse ponimali, takogo roda investitsii by ne bylo.

I'm talking about an objective approach (as possible) to determine the quality of art.


Na segodniashnii den 'net NIKAKOI ob'ektivnosti ni v kachestve ni v tsenah na iskusstvo.

Why investing in old masters are much less risky than in contemporary art?

Starye mastera, v luchshem sluchae derzat tsenu, a eto znachit, chto ih stoimost 'padaet, infliatsiia, soderzanie, strahovka, hranenie - perecherknut vse dohody.


Because these items have long been dispersed to private collections, and this very fact makes it impossible and pointless so-called "promotion" name of the application of all existing at the moment "tools."

Sovershenno ne soglasen. Naprimer El 'Greko byl raskruchen sovershenno nedavno.

 And two important moment of determining the reliability of the old investment masterov.Vo First, they are many times bought and sold,

Absoliutno ne fakt.


but because the demand for them is not efimeren, but real, as evidenced by century-old practice of sales.

Ne rabotaet v tselom. Mozet byt 'na paru desiatkov imion.


Secondly, what emerges from the first, or vice versa, the objects of the old art of high quality rarely come on the market.

Of course, no small importance is the fact that the old masters have long taken their place in art history.

Daleko ne vse.

Of course, you can buy art, not figuring in it, but it is devoid of any pleasure, and inevitably leads to the ingress of money in the future.

Iskusstvo eto drugoi rynok, eto rynok predmetov roskoshi /prestiza, ot kotoryh vladel'tsy ne ozidaiut dohoda. Kupiv novyi Merc, vy teriaete tysiach 50 cherez sekundu posle peresecheniia granitsy magazina.

Prichiny dlia pokupki drugie.

In this case, you need to buy for fun (that would not sozhelet Lost ivistitsiyah). But what is fun, if you do not understand what you're doing?

Kak eto ne ponimaesh '? I trachu svoi den'gi na to, na chto moi sosed potratit 'ne mozet.

That's all full circle ...

Da netu kruga.
Ladno, zakanchivaiu rynochnyi likbez. Knizki chitaite ne tol'ko po iskusstvu. Po rynku, o den'gah i bankah. I budet u vas ponimanie, a to nelovko vas chitat '.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Vladimir

It's a pity that the theme about Faibisovich again jumped on the role of Hirst's in art history.

And you can both by topic and an administrator in one person "clean" theme, and all neotnosyaschiesya to the exhibition Seeds Faibisovich "obvious", move to another topic. In some Reflections at the entrance of the exhibition "Evidence" ...
Also will be interesting, but it is beyond discussion Faibisovich and exhibitions.

[AlexanderG]

Da ne strashno, prosto tema vil'nula

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от artcol

Actually, sorry
Where can the maximum extent familiar with his work, not to be hasty in the estimates? I think I rushed about "no integrity" - he is just a series all.

About artistic albums do not know. Do not be surprised if they do not even have. While. But if you look complex, it is worth reading his prose. Published many books, but in selling what little remains. Here's a collection of Rome http://www.ozon.ru/context/detail/id/2312102/

Stop - in the exhibition to sell books. Maybe it was a new album?

[таша]

Сообщение от Konstantin

I did not like the new series. Neither the technique of performance, nor the stories (look at the downcast people are not best pleased) nor, most importantly, energy. Nothing comes from paintings

Сообщение от Vladimir

Again, my problem in the new series appeared choice of subjects. Homeless least gold leaf painting - will not be pleasant.

About the stories: Who said what should be a pleasure? You're talking about investments, and money does not smell. Faibisovich-bright, talented representative of photorealism. From the Russian artists of the direction of one of the most powerful. And, actually does not matter (for investment) that he would submit to the court, so to speak. But for the artist is important. Paint a "nude" - get a "glamor". Paint a homeless person, no blame.

[Seriy]

Vladimir, but as you are homeless?