Artist sued for not claiming art he did not do....

[blbronco]

this looks like fun. I am not blaming the legal system, but this is a messed up lawsuit.

http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/artist-sued-for-5m-over-painting-he-insists-he-didnt-paint/

 

[FMPoke]

Well it looks like something you would buy for $100 at any third monday trade show but what do I know about art. I can see both sides to this possibility. If you have become a famous artist the value of your painting including ones you still have or may produce in the future is tied to how rare they are. You don't want a bunch of stuff you whipped out when you were 18 suddenly showing up and diluting the market. On the other hand I would say there's a 99% chance it's a fake.

The fact that it's good enough to fool major art experts tells you a lot about the art world. Value is 99% perception and 1% actual talent.

 

[Cowpoke]

I'm betting that is not his. Doig seems to have a pretty good alibi for not having even been there, plus, it looks nothing like his style.

However, if it WERE his, I can see where the owner is coming from in the lawsuit. Remove the fact that this is an artist and a painting, etc. Reduce it down to its basic components: You own something worth potentially millions, and a man lies rendering it worthless. That seems sue worthy to me.

 

[Cowpoke]

Well it looks like something you would buy for $100 at any third monday trade show but what do I know about art. I can see both sides to this possibility. If you have become a famous artist the value of your painting including ones you still have or may produce in the future is tied to how rare they are. You don't want a bunch of stuff you whipped out when you were 18 suddenly showing up and diluting the market. On the other hand I would say there's a 99% chance it's a fake.

The fact that it's good enough to fool major art experts tells you a lot about the art world. Value is 99% perception and 1% actual talent.

I don't think its a fake, I think its mistaken identity like Doig says. Hell the name isn't even spelled right. I think the "Sotheby’s specialist" exposed herself as clueless.

 

[MegaPoke]

Can't really understand the supposed motivation for him disclaiming it unless the argument is he thinks it sucks and detracts from his current brand value. But I've never heard of that or him for that matter.

 

[Cowpoke]

Can't really understand the supposed motivation for him disclaiming it unless the argument is he thinks it sucks and detracts from his current brand value. But I've never heard of that or him for that matter.

That and every artist on the planet has pieces of artwork from early in their career that they think sucks. That doesn't detract value.

 

[FMPoke]

I don't think its a fake, I think its mistaken identity like Doig says. Hell the name isn't even spelled right. I think the "Sotheby’s specialist" exposed herself as clueless.

Hard to believe there was actually another artist with almost the same name, from the same area, painted in a style so close to his as to fool an expert. Too much of a coincidence for me. Has to be a scam.

 

[MegaPoke]

That and every artist on the planet has pieces of artwork from early in their career that they think sucks. That doesn't detract value.

Exactly. I think early stuff serves a great purpose though to illustrate a stylistic arc. No point in lying about it that I can see - even if in hindsight it's embarrassing.

 

[Cowpoke]

Exactly. I think early stuff serves a great purpose though to illustrate a stylistic arc. No point in lying about it that I can see - even if in hindsight it's embarrassing.

Exactly. I actually enjoy showing people my horrendous early stuff. Shows how far I've come and lets them see that if they are interested in trying their hand at art, they don't have to be "good" at it at first.