This is about the atrophying value of common sense, and the value of the sweat on our brows. Our country is going broke, people are starving, and we have ignorant people buying old cameras that probably don't even work.
This is about the atrophying value of common sense, and the value of the sweat on our brows. Our country is going broke, people are starving, and we have ignorant people buying old cameras that probably don't even work.
Did the person who bought the camera buy it with stolen money or something? If not then I don't see what the problem is
This is about the atrophying value of common sense, and the value of the sweat on our brows. Our country is going broke, people are starving, and we have ignorant people buying old cameras that probably don't even work.
Did the person who bought the camera buy it with taxpayer money or something? If not then I don't see what the problem is
While it is true modern camera are around 230,000 miles better than that camera, and you can buy them for much less than $500; however they don't have the same history to them.
This is about the atrophying value of common sense, and the value of the sweat on our brows. Our country is going broke, people are starving, and we have ignorant people buying old cameras that probably don't even work.
Did the person who bought the camera buy it with taxpayer money or something? If not then I don't see what the problem is
My view as well. Whatever they do with their money is their perogative.
Not sure about that particular model, but generally speaking Hasselblads are excellent cameras. They are indeed better than many of the crappy modern cameras available today.
Which is sort of irrelevant. Whoever bought that thing obviously has no intention of ever actually using it.
It has extremely important historical value, more so than paintings that go for dozens of millions+ ..... (first time humanity reached moon vs. some drawing)
"Why buy the Mona Lisa when you can just print it online for .1cents!"
It has extremely important historical value, more so than paintings that go for dozens of millions+ ..... (first time humanity reached moon vs. some drawing)
"Why buy the Mona Lisa when you can just print it online for .1cents!"
I believe I can answer that. It's because the rarity of an object that is an immensely important artifact trumps printing Mona Lisa on a Xerox printing paper multiple times, as that would decrease the value of the picture because there would be more than or equal to 10 Xerox copies in the specified market.
It has extremely important historical value, more so than paintings that go for dozens of millions+ ..... (first time humanity reached moon vs. some drawing)
"Why buy the Mona Lisa when you can just print it online for .1cents!"
I believe I can answer that. It's because the rarity of an object that is an immensely important artifact trumps printing Mona Lisa on a Xerox printing paper multiple times, as that would decrease the value of the picture because there would be more than or equal to 10 Xerox copies in the specified market.
The Mona Lisa is only worth money because it was the first woman ever painted.
This is about the atrophying value of common sense, and the value of the sweat on our brows. Our country is going broke, people are starving, and we have ignorant people buying old cameras that probably don't even work.
It has extremely important historical value, more so than paintings that go for dozens of millions+ ..... (first time humanity reached moon vs. some drawing)
"Why buy the Mona Lisa when you can just print it online for .1cents!"
I believe I can answer that. It's because the rarity of an object that is an immensely important artifact trumps printing Mona Lisa on a Xerox printing paper multiple times, as that would decrease the value of the picture because there would be more than or equal to 10 Xerox copies in the specified market.
The Mona Lisa is only worth money because it was the first woman ever painted.
You have got to be the stupidest person on the internet. I nominate you.
It has extremely important historical value, more so than paintings that go for dozens of millions+ ..... (first time humanity reached moon vs. some drawing)
"Why buy the Mona Lisa when you can just print it online for .1cents!"
I believe I can answer that. It's because the rarity of an object that is an immensely important artifact trumps printing Mona Lisa on a Xerox printing paper multiple times, as that would decrease the value of the picture because there would be more than or equal to 10 Xerox copies in the specified market.
The Mona Lisa is only worth money because it was the first woman ever painted.
You have got to be the stupidest person on the internet. I nominate you.
It's a well known fact she was. Learn your history.
It has extremely important historical value, more so than paintings that go for dozens of millions+ ..... (first time humanity reached moon vs. some drawing)
"Why buy the Mona Lisa when you can just print it online for .1cents!"
I believe I can answer that. It's because the rarity of an object that is an immensely important artifact trumps printing Mona Lisa on a Xerox printing paper multiple times, as that would decrease the value of the picture because there would be more than or equal to 10 Xerox copies in the specified market.
The Mona Lisa is only worth money because it was the first woman ever painted.
You have got to be the stupidest person on the internet. I nominate you.
It's a well known fact she was. Learn your history.
Ya?
1400s Botticelli tempera painting of a young woman
It has extremely important historical value, more so than paintings that go for dozens of millions+ ..... (first time humanity reached moon vs. some drawing)
"Why buy the Mona Lisa when you can just print it online for .1cents!"
I believe I can answer that. It's because the rarity of an object that is an immensely important artifact trumps printing Mona Lisa on a Xerox printing paper multiple times, as that would decrease the value of the picture because there would be more than or equal to 10 Xerox copies in the specified market.
The Mona Lisa is only worth money because it was the first woman ever painted.
You have got to be the stupidest person on the internet. I nominate you.
It's a well known fact she was. Learn your history.
Ya?
1400s Botticelli tempera painting of a young woman
Who's the one that needs to learn History now?
Pretty sure that's half a woman, where's her other side?
It has extremely important historical value, more so than paintings that go for dozens of millions+ ..... (first time humanity reached moon vs. some drawing)
"Why buy the Mona Lisa when you can just print it online for .1cents!"
I believe I can answer that. It's because the rarity of an object that is an immensely important artifact trumps printing Mona Lisa on a Xerox printing paper multiple times, as that would decrease the value of the picture because there would be more than or equal to 10 Xerox copies in the specified market.
The Mona Lisa is only worth money because it was the first woman ever painted.
You have got to be the stupidest person on the internet. I nominate you.
It's a well known fact she was. Learn your history.
Ya?
1400s Botticelli tempera painting of a young woman
Who's the one that needs to learn History now?
Pretty sure that's half a woman, where's her other side?
It has extremely important historical value, more so than paintings that go for dozens of millions+ ..... (first time humanity reached moon vs. some drawing)
"Why buy the Mona Lisa when you can just print it online for .1cents!"
I believe I can answer that. It's because the rarity of an object that is an immensely important artifact trumps printing Mona Lisa on a Xerox printing paper multiple times, as that would decrease the value of the picture because there would be more than or equal to 10 Xerox copies in the specified market.
The Mona Lisa is only worth money because it was the first woman ever painted.
You have got to be the stupidest person on the internet. I nominate you.
It's a well known fact she was. Learn your history.
Ya?
1400s Botticelli tempera painting of a young woman
Who's the one that needs to learn History now?
Pretty sure that's half a woman, where's her other side?
I would say it depends on what the "art" is. For example, I once went to an art museum for a research paper (art class). I saw a pickup truck there. The bed was full of what I would consider trash and other crap. I don't think of something like that as art. I also don't think graffiti should be considered art, yet I've seen that at art museums as well.
It has extremely important historical value, more so than paintings that go for dozens of millions+ ..... (first time humanity reached moon vs. some drawing)
"Why buy the Mona Lisa when you can just print it online for .1cents!"
I believe I can answer that. It's because the rarity of an object that is an immensely important artifact trumps printing Mona Lisa on a Xerox printing paper multiple times, as that would decrease the value of the picture because there would be more than or equal to 10 Xerox copies in the specified market.
The Mona Lisa is only worth money because it was the first woman ever painted.
You have got to be the stupidest person on the internet. I nominate you.
It's a well known fact she was. Learn your history.
Ya?
1400s Botticelli tempera painting of a young woman
Who's the one that needs to learn History now?
Pretty sure that's half a woman, where's her other side?
Well at least that camera has a lot of BIG historic value to it. Tbh I thought that was kind of cheap for it to be sold, I was expecting a couple millions. After all, this painting was sold for about $44 Million...
Well at least that camera has a lot of BIG historic value to it. Tbh I thought that was kind of cheap for it to be sold, I was expecting a couple millions. After all, this painting was sold for about $44 Million...
Yes that is right, and here is the source.
LOLWTF?! That's just a poorly drawn line (I say poorly-drawn due to the smudged edges).
I'd maybe pay 10 bucks for it, if that. Personally, I think it's a worthless painting some child can make.
And can you believe that people pay thousands for paintings when you can get paint at an art supply shop for only a few quid!
Pretty sure that camera didn't paint any mona lisas
Well why would anyone pay exorbitant amounts of money for the original mona lisa when you can get reproductions for a couple bucks that are far superior and dont have cracking and flaking paint?
Well at least that camera has a lot of BIG historic value to it. Tbh I thought that was kind of cheap for it to be sold, I was expecting a couple millions. After all, this painting was sold for about $44 Million...
Yes that is right, and here is the source.
What's the significance of that painting (historic or otherwise)?
I'm just saying, you're defending spending almost a million dollars on a 45 year old pile of metal, glass, and plastic that probably doesn't even work any more. You're doing this based on historic value, as in you're stating that its value is what it REPRESENTS rather than what it IS.
So, with that in mind, what is the contextual value of that painting? It's easy to reduce it, to say "it's just paint on canvas" or "it's just blue with a white line down the middle", but by that same logic we could reduce any historic item to the value of its bare ingredients. The fact is that if a painting sells for $44 million, then SOMEONE obviously sees some kind of symbolic value in it. How is that any different than the symbolic value that is attached to a half-century old camera that sells for almost a million dollars?
Log in to comment