World's most expensive photo - where we are going wrong

[davidedric]

I expect many members will know this, but I didn't. This image, called Rhein II, sold for £2.7m in New York last year.



Worse, the image doesn't exist. A factory and some dog walkers had to be cloned out to make "an image of a modern river".

I don't think it would place in a CiC mini comp, but I guess that shows how little I know and why I'm not a millionaire

[Colin Southern]

I expect many members will know this, but I didn't. This image, called Rhein II, sold for £2.7m in New York last year.



Worse, the image doesn't exist. A factory and some dog walkers had to be cloned out to make "an image of a modern river".

I don't think it would place in a CiC mini comp, but I guess that shows how little I know and why I'm not a millionaire

Hi Dave,

Yeah - we discussed it a while back.

In response, I shot a better one and put it up for sale for only $1,000,000.

It's still available if you're interested ...

[AB26]

Then some members ask me where the subject is in some of my images. How about the horizon slap bang in the middle. If I had to say it is flat? Won't recomend enlarging and hanging this one on a wall.
I could have done it and retired.

[oleleclos]

This image, called Rhein II, sold for £2.7m in New York last year.

Says more about the emperor's new clothes that is modern art than it does about photography, fortunately

[Loose Canon]

Huh?

Well gee whiz! I liked it so much I bought two of them.

Got them hanging in my bathrooms!

[Colin Southern]

Huh?

Well gee whiz! I liked it so much I bought two of them.

Got them hanging in my bathrooms!

Must be big bathrooms - they're printed 73 x 143 inches.

http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/l...jectID=5496716

[Andrew76]

Hi Dave,

Yeah - we discussed it a while back.

In response, I shot a better one and put it up for sale for only $1,000,000.

It's still available if you're interested ...

The problem with Colin's one million dollar one is that I took one very similar, and marketed it at $900,000. I've been selling prints like hotcakes. Sorry Colin, I should have cut you in.

[Bobobird]

Sorry guys, I did a "Donald" of something similar and printed it on metal and ceramic. A factory in Abistan is making millions of them as cladding for building exteriors. Another factory is making the ceramic versions for kitchens, bathrooms, floors etc. Clearing GBP 16,000,001 a day as my share of the profits (sorry Ortega, you are now 2nd). At this rate everything in the world will bear this pattern including camera bodies.

[Melkus]

I'm selling my stuff too cheap

[Loose Canon]

Must be big bathrooms - they're printed 73 x 143 inches.

Nah!

I was able to get the 8"x10" versions for half price!

[MrB]

The image is rather confused, with a plethora wave crests competing for the viewer's attention. The photographer should have recognised this as a problem, and used a very slow shutter speed to introduce a substantial motion blur onto the surface of the river. However, even then, the green tones of the layers of grass would still be a distraction from the flat, featureless sky - desaturating these, or a complete B&W conversion, would have restored some sort of equilibrium to the image. In view of these shortcomings, it is perhaps surprising that bidding for the photograph did not stop at £2.6 million.

Philip

[tybrad]

I'm sorry... I do not see the problem.

There is a difference between value and art.
There is a difference between monetary value and aesthetic value.
I have routinely read on many photog forums about it being OK to use clone stamping and severe editing to make an image look better in the name of perceived vision; it's a product of the easiness of digital formats in allowing manipulations on this scale. That's not OK in my photography and in today's digital world it is difficult for me to see and discern what is "real" and what is not in media. If that's what you personally do then OK. Just don't use a different judgment criterion on this photo.

I'm not trying to start a war or a film/digital divide here, but in the end the photo is worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

Still learning,
Tyler

[AB26]

The price would only have made sense if it was signed by Ansel Adams.

[davidedric]

Only meant as a weekend diversion......

But still, if I had posted it as my own image, and asked for C&C, I wonder what would have been said

[Colin Southern]

Sorry Colin, I should have cut you in.

It's not too late

[Colin Southern]

Sorry guys, I did a "Donald" of something similar and printed it on metal and ceramic. A factory in Abistan is making millions of them as cladding for building exteriors. Another factory is making the ceramic versions for kitchens, bathrooms, floors etc. Clearing GBP 16,000,001 a day as my share of the profits (sorry Ortega, you are now 2nd). At this rate everything in the world will bear this pattern including camera bodies.

Forwarded to the tax dept!

[Colin Southern]

Nah!

I was able to get the 8"x10" versions for half price!

Interestingly I did note from the Christies auction site that it IS edition 1 of a run of up to 6 -- I wonder what the others would go for?

[Colin Southern]

The image is rather confused, with a plethora wave crests competing for the viewer's attention. The photographer should have recognised this as a problem, and used a very slow shutter speed

... would probably have made it harder to clone out the moving person & dog ...

[Colin Southern]

in the end the photo is worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

For sure. Perhaps what draws so much comment though is the fact that it was expected to fetch millions - it did fetch millions - and yet its something that most of us wouldn't pay $20 for.

[Colin Southern]

Only meant as a weekend diversion......

But still, if I had posted it as my own image, and asked for C&C, I wonder what would have been said

Interestingly, I think it would be a very easy image to copy.