Ratings artists on the site

[Сергеич]

Looked ratings site, in my opinion turned out excellent! And the information is unique, and easy to use - as you can sort by any column.

But I have a question to the administration. I can not understand nothing, there is every artist's written a date in the 3rd column and another later in the brackets. About the rating since 2001, said that a final date, the other primary. This kind of clear the last and first sale for the entire period. But in the ratings for 2 and 1 year indicated only the closing date and initial all just for 2 or 1 year less than the ultimate. Is that - all artists of the first sale was exactly 2 years or 1 year earlier than the last? Something hard to believe. What was the matter - or is it some kind of mistake?

[Admin]

Dear Sergeyitch, no error in the dates there. You probably do not fully explain carefully read the pages of rankings.

In any ratings for each artist listed two dates - the final and initial. As of this date and they are counted together, in fact, the criteria for placement of the artist at a particular position rankings - the yield or rate of growth.

For the rankings since 2001, those dates - in fact, the date of the last and first sales of taken into account in rating works on the world's major auctions (note the words "taken into account in the rating, because not all sold by the artists are allowed to participate in the rating).

For rating for 2 years and 1 year in the column "Date" and the date are taken into account in the rating of the auction sale. But the start date, defended by exactly 2, or 1 year from the end - is not a real auction sale date, but simply the date on which calculated the initial value of the test arrangement of artists. In other words can explain it well. Imagine - or look at the site, clicking on the name of any artist in the rating - a graph of the investment index artist in time. The last point graphics - is the final date that you see in the table under the column "Date". Start date for the same rating for 2 and 1 year is removed from the sharp end for the corresponding period - 2 or 1 year. That the estimated value of the index, which you see in the corresponding point on the graph, and is taken as the initial value while determining the placement of art in the ranking.

So no inconsistency there, all information is correct in the rankings.

I hope that explained clearly (although, I fear, to understand it converges not so simple). If there are more questions - ask, do not be shy.

[Сергеич]

Admin, thank you, kind of figured out all right.

[Meister]

rating - a useful thing ... helps us understand who was popular, who is to outline some sort of trend ... I remember because at the time of Expressionists was ... at the beginning of 2000, they were clearly underestimated, but to make it understanding had to dig through all the sales, but here the overall level of graphics .. understandable for investors useful thing.

[K-Maler]

Сообщение от Meister

ratings - a useful thing ... helps us understand who was popular, who is to outline some sort of trend ... I remember because in his time with the Expressionists was ... in early 2000, they were clearly underestimated, but in order to understand it had to review all sales, but here the overall level of graphics .. understandable for investors useful thing.
__________________

Maybe someone would vote on the "One feature ranking SV Zagraevskogo, where a large number of contemporary artists is divided into grams." V "- konyukturschikov, which, according to the compilers, only about prdavaemosti his pictures and think, and high spiritual "gr." A "- which neither ochem not think so at all. Among artists, many do not agree with this question in general.

[Buscador]

Сообщение от K-Maler

Maybe someone would vote on the "One feature rankings"

As with any publication, it is enough subektivet. We (a group of persons) have the impression that there top artists, sold on the territory of Russia. Some folk artists of Ukraine there is simply not included?

[Сергеич]

That is what is in the network on this topic.

Criticism

In connection with the appearance of so-called "Rating the trade union of artists; nomination" painter and graphic artist. "Condition on May 16, 2000" consider it necessary to report the following.

Читать дальше... 

, created with the union of artists' Rating Center (RC) drew attention to the galleries, museums, collectors and all interested parties, potential buyers of paintings and graphics both in Russia and abroad "rating" more than three thousand contemporary Russian artists. Artists are divided into groups A - creators of "working out of spiritual installations" in - mostly traders, market-oriented, and each group into seven categories - the artists of world-class artists simply high-class, professional artists, etc. To this is added icons "plus", meaning future growth of the artist and its transition to a higher category, and minus the probability of degradation and, consequently, the fall rankings. According to the drafters, each seller, buyer, collector, gallerist ekspozitsioneru, etc. "sooner or later need to know the rating of" their "artist and have the opportunity to renew his certificate." Thus, the RC at the trade union of artists claimed the role of higher arts expert and an arbitrator, approved by their "rating" should in principle be based Estimates in terms of determining the place of the artist in contemporary art, establishing the market value of his works and their artistic value of the museum, which will be confirmed official document - issued by the RC quality certificate. Rating Center is grateful for the "information, advice and assistance in the work of rating" to the Moscow Government, Ministry of Culture, State Institute of Art, Russia Academy of Arts, the Association of Art (AIS), the Union of Artists of Russia, Moscow branch of the Union of Artists of Russia and yet fifty organizations, magazines, galleries, exhibition halls, etc. According to the chairman of the Professional Union of Artists, Mr. SV Zagraevskogo on professional preparation of rating so far there have been no complaints. No wonder - work on it the best critics of Russia. "

Shall make known artist first and foremost, as well as all stakeholders - collectors, gallery owners, museum staff and exhibition halls, patrons, sponsors, etc. The proposed RC The idea of "ranking" met with an extremely negative attitude of specialists, was rejected by the PRINCIPAL as a deeply flawed, originally completely arbitrary and inherently biased, has a nature of advertising designed to suit someone's commercial interests or personal biases based on arbitrary judgments of persons anyone on it is not authorized, hang on artists LABELS, thereby predetermining their creative destiny. No reference to the need to streamline the art market can not be justified by an attempt to degrade the art to the level of consumer goods, recorded in trade directories according to GOST, market value and consumer demand. This practice may be, and having a place anywhere in the world, fundamentally contradicts the humanist tradition RUSSIAN CULTURE.

That is the assessment of the project was given a "known critics of Russia" - employees of the State Institute of Art, members of the Academy of Arts and AIS, art history section of the Union of Artists of Russia and its Moscow office. None of them did not consent to participate in the development of a "rating" and only "advice" was on the board of the union of artists and the RC immediately abandon its unnecessary and harmful idea. The proposed "rating" - the fruit of lies solely of the members of a rating group, lies entirely on their responsibility, reflects their subjective views and may not have any POWER REFERENCE. We are deeply angered members of the immoral behavior of the RC, their blatant attempt to mislead the artists and a wide range of people interested in the fate of contemporary Russian art.

AI Komech,
Director of State Institute of Art

ZK Tsereteli
Rocsiyskoy president of the Academy of Arts

AI Morozov,
Chairman of the Association of Art (AIS)

V. Sidorov,
Chairman of the Union of Artists of Russia

VA Bubnov
Chairman of the Moscow Union of Artists

Pay attention to the signatories.

[Wladzislaw]

In my opinion, Archil Gorkého should be removed from the ranking.

[Сергеич]

And he was in what?

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Wladzislaw

In my opinion, Archil Gorkého should be removed from the ranking.

Why? Why not our people? In the empire lived, let it be ours. Such personnel should be protected. For him, incidentally, has long been closely watched by collectors Russian diaspora.