
Amazon launches Amazon Art marketplace - jqueryin
http://www.amazon.com/art
======
simonsarris
I've only looked over their painting selection, but I have seen far nicer
works go for far less at Skinner's and Sotheby's auctions (in and near
Boston).

If this site jives your interest at all, I _highly_ recommend looking through
an art auction catalog. You can find GORGEOUS 18th and 19th century pieces for
excellent prices (Less than $2000) at many auctions.

Here's a Skinner's online catalog:

[http://issuu.com/skinnerinc/docs/2655b_paintings/1](http://issuu.com/skinnerinc/docs/2655b_paintings/1)

(It's worth noting that everyone likes different things, and its entirely
possible I am unimpressed with Amazon's offering because its different than
most of my aesthetic expectations, and not because the art Amazon is offering
is unimpressive.)

------
adregan
I wonder what the Artsy ([http://artsy.net/](http://artsy.net/)) folks think
of this?

I won't speak to the quality of art on the Amazon site as I browsed rather
shallowly and don't have anything nice to say. Rather I will comment on the
presentation.

This is certainly a time when Amazon's one size fits all store presentation
falls flat. There is a whole field of expertise involving the presentation of
art, and they haven't done a great job of making it look appealing.

Then again, maybe it's appropriate that a search for Warhol paintings share a
layout with a search for Campbell's soup:

Warhol:
[http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=node%3D6685299011...](http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=node%3D6685299011&field-
keywords=warhol&rh=n%3A6685299011%2Ck%3Awarhol)

Soup:
[http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_hi_4?rh=n%3A16310101%2Cn%3A64...](http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_hi_4?rh=n%3A16310101%2Cn%3A6461478011%2Cn%3A6464939011%2Cn%3A16319621%2Ck%3Acampbell%27s+soup&keywords=campbell%27s+soup&ie=UTF8&qid=1375789406)

Edit: adding a link to Arsty for those who are unfamiliar.

~~~
kawera
_I wonder what the Artsy ([http://artsy.net/](http://artsy.net/)) folks think
of this?_

Probably not much. After a certain amount, selling art is a relationship
business and the seller's reputation is paramount. Artsy is very well
connected and do a great job in their presentation.

~~~
dfriedmn
Also, this might answer the question of potential acquirers...

------
fatjokes
The only thing I discovered after browsing through that site is that I am too
poor to own art.

~~~
mhitza
If you like printed digital art, you can buy them from
[Curioos]([http://www.curioos.com/](http://www.curioos.com/)) at a relatively
cheap price.

~~~
Mekza
Curioos is NOT "digital art", It's barely a printer for "Digital painting".

~~~
mhitza
I was not aware of the distinction till now.

------
niels_olson
For anyone who thinks they might ever own art, first, I highly recommend it. I
love art. I don't even know why. But it makes me happy. I think what it comes
down to is pride and satisfaction that in some way, my society has makers, one
of whom made this thing to put it in the world, ultimately. That's the only
reason it was made. Art is art. And everything else, is everything else.

Second, read Don Thompson's The Twelve Million Dollar Stuffed Shark.* He's an
economist who took a deep dive into the very dysfunctional world of expensive
art. What he leaves you with is a better understanding of the situation: screw
investment. Saatchi buys art because he loves art. Yes, he's built a fortune
on it, but he also has the largest collection of undisplayed art, and it's
estimated the average value of any piece in his collection may be no more than
the world-wide average. But he plays his role well, and his role, an ad man,
integrates very well with the scene.

If you want art, buy it. But I recommend buying local. Art is the ultimate
buy-local situation. My brother is an artist. That's as local as it gets. And
his is the best art I own.

I'm starting to realize a little of Saatchi's situation: if you want to show,
really show, those favorite pieces, then you have to give them a lot of wall
space. Which means a lot of stuff, good stuff, ends up in crates. You realize
you're willing to sell it just because it breaks your heart for it to not be
shown. But you'll be damned before you let it hang on a wall where it wouldn't
be appreciated at all.

If you don't know many artists (if it wasn't for my brother's inside access, I
would know none), I think this Amazon Fine Art thing is a fine place to start.
Check the under $200 category. There's some really great pieces in there.

The other things are craigslist and gallery mailing lists. Sign up. You'll
learn if your city tends to do openings on Wednesdays, Thursdays, etc. The
whole scene tends to get into sync. Meet some artists. If you have something
particular, a desk, a portrait, I don't know many artists who are unwilling to
work on commission. Guaranteed money is hard to come by in the art world.

\----------

*[http://www.amazon.com/The-Million-Stuffed-Shark-Contemporary...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Million-Stuffed-Shark-Contemporary/dp/0230620590)

------
ramblerman
I just don't get it, 20k for pieces like this:
[http://www.amazon.com/Firecracker/dp/B00E70BZ3K/ref=sr_1_22?...](http://www.amazon.com/Firecracker/dp/B00E70BZ3K/ref=sr_1_22?s=art&ie=UTF8&qid=1375797976&sr=1-22&keywords=pop+art)

I wonder if people would appraise it quite as highly without context, and the
painter's life story.

~~~
BenoitEssiambre
A lot of collectibles' value comes not from the objects themselves but from
the exceptional contexts which spawned the objects

Wouldn't you pay more for a prop that was actually used on the set of your
favorite movie instead of an identical reproduction?

Wouldn't you pay more for an object that was a key during an important
historical event even though there are many objects like it used by unknown
people in unknown contexts?

Wouldn't you pay more to collect an original tool invented by your favorite
pioneer scientist even though there are much better versions of this tool in
use today?

Wouldn't you pay more for works by an artist that invented new innovative
techniques than artists who just reuse others' techniques even if the later
artists arguably get better results because they are using the techniques
after they have matured and have been perfected?

~~~
jlgreco
No on all counts. Maybe I just lack some sort of collectors spirit.

------
anarchitect
I've worked for a string of online art retailers and publishers over the the
last decade, and I'm a bit baffled by this move by Amazon.

I just don't think it's a very good way to browse for art. That said, if you
know specifically what you want, it's a pretty good way to connect with
galleries.

~~~
VLM
My guess is "soon" we'll have a 500 dpi full color e-ink kindle to admire
rentable art. And perhaps a giant e-ink kindle to hang on the wall for exactly
that purpose.

One of my long term "in my infinite spare time" projects has been to build a
nice small (well, what passes for small now...) HDTV size digital picture
frame and rotate artwork on it. I figure if I can keep the capital cost under
a couple hundred bucks (no problemo) and power consumption under a hundred
watts (aka about $100/yr, also Probably no problem) then I'll do it. This is
all well within my ability to do it, other than spare time.

I don't want a COTS digital pix frame because the API (if any) sucks and you
can't buy one bigger than roughly a postcard whereas I want "big artwork"
sized. Also I want high res.

Another interesting idea about "real art" is most TV user interfaces have the
lamest most uncool backgrounds and "artwork" I've ever seen. I'd like a nice
piece of real art instead. A big digital clearinghouse would help.

~~~
acidity
Oh wow. I have been thinking of exactly the same idea. To that end, I just
started playing around with Raspberry PI to see if it can work out. Looking
online, seems they also have color E-Ink available which should make the cost
even less.

Would you like to chat?

~~~
VLM
Well, there's not much to say.

About a decade ago I had a 24x7 linux based fileserver / LDAP / NFS / mp3
jukebox / misc box available at home which had nothing plugged into the VGA
out... so I installed "zgv" (which is still available) because it is a console
mode graphics viewer which can do slideshows. So I didn't have to bother with
all of X on what was fundamentally a home fileserver. I had a very simple
shell script to clean out a directory, wget pictures from all over the net (I
had the local wx radar, and street scene webcams in Ireland, all kinds of
stuff like that) and dump all the downloaded files (including 404 errors and
the like) into the directory. Then I ran each graphic file thru a processor
mostly so it would eat 404 errors and failed downloads and the like so they
disappear rather than mess up the slideshow also to resize to the proper res.
Then zgv in slideshow mode would display each pic for X seconds, and do it Y
times, such that it took about 15 minutes to run, or maybe it was a half hour.
Then rinse and repeat forever. Even with some abstraction and file renaming to
force the order in the slideshow, we're talking about a "two screenful" bash
script, it wasn't much.

The analog VGA output was fed into a gadget that converted certain VGA
resolutions into composite video (This is why I was using imagemagick filters
to resize the images, my converter didn't work well at certain SVGA compatible
resolutions which "zgv" would use..) That composite signal via some modulators
went all over the house. There's a lot more to that story. I basically had a
crude cable TV plant in my house. A handful of highpass/lowpass filters and
some cheap composite to NTSC modulators costs less than you'd think.

If I had to do it over again I'd probably steer toward X windows for the
graphics, I'd bother to actually figure out how to auto-start the system
rather than log in by hand at each (rare) reboot to run the script (probably
outta inittab, errr.. systemd I guess). Given modern screensavers and the like
it might amount to just boot up GDM/KDM/somethingDM and let a script update
the screensaver directory of pictures... I have not kept up with modern FOSS
developments WRT digital picture frames, the whole software setup might just
be an "apt-get" away now. Or if not, it should be. Some double buffering so I
could download and process the next set of "slides" such that the transition
would be smooth and instantaneous when it updates, would be nice, and probably
not too hard.

Color eink is not really available. I have a small BW eink shield and vaguely
postage stamp sized display for an arduino. The price was unpleasant. I
thought it humorous that to show the durability and no-power required of the
e-ink they ship it displaying some Chinese characters rather than blank. At
this time I think we're stuck with LCDs although Amazon, with its special
history and relationship with e-ink could probably sell the worlds first
actually shipping color e-ink digital picture frame. Which is my suspicion
about the whole "amazon art" thing.

I want a "huge" picture frame. Not a little commercially available thing or
even a hacked up laptop. So I'm probably stuck with TVs/Monitors (not much
difference anymore) for now.

------
kirpekar
Fake reviews?

[http://www.amazon.com/LEnfant-tasse-portrait-Jean-
Monet/dp/B...](http://www.amazon.com/LEnfant-tasse-portrait-Jean-
Monet/dp/B00E2PAN0Q/ref=sr_1_2?s=art&ie=UTF8&qid=1375812833&sr=1-2)

------
cocoflunchy
I'd like to do an affiliate sale on this one...
[http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00DV8CMCM/ref=as_li_ss_tl?...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00DV8CMCM/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00DV8CMCM&linkCode=as2&tag=cocoflunchy-20)

Even with the lowest rate of 4%, that would be $194,000 in my pocket.

(disclaimer: affiliate link)

~~~
libria
Tsk, had it in my cart and was about to place my order but it wasn't eligible
for Prime 2nd day shipping =(.

------
salgernon
<ramble> Art is so completely subjective. In a house I bought, we found a
painting by an artist named Marshall Merritt - we see his paintings being sold
for $10k - very similar in size and composition. But when we had it appraised,
the appraiser told us $300. Go figure.

Aside from a portrait of my wife, my favorite art purchases have been from
Robert Tinney, who did the covers for Byte Magazine from the early 80s. He
sells his "limited edition prints" directly. But the point is not that it is
an investment, but that I actually just really find pleasure in his work. His
is the only art that I've bought online - and only then because I already had
a copy of the work in question as a magazine cover! </ramble>

I notice that the Amazon works are all sold and shipped by individual
galleries. I wouldn't be surprised if you could purchase directly from them
for considerably less than via Amazon.

------
jdmitch
This seems pretty incredible, unless there is something not entirely
straightforward about who has actually made them. $1200-$2000 for an original
limited edition Salvador Dali or Marc Chagall print, seems like a steal. Maybe
I just don't know much about how less rare artworks of well-known artists tend
to be priced though...

~~~
justincormack
Prints are cheap. These are not signed, "signed on plate" means the engraving
plate was signed but that does not mean the print was supervised by the artist
so they are semi mass produced. But even signed prints by moderately well
known artists are cheap as they are very unfashionable.

~~~
lmm
>even signed prints by moderately well known artists are cheap as they are
very unfashionable.

Sounds like it's a good time to buy them then?

~~~
justincormack
If you like them. Art is not a good investment.

------
jonathanjaeger
I'm a fan of society6 -- sure it's not expensive art, but you can buy some
pretty cool stretched canvasses for $85-$150 depending on the size you want.
Of course you're also getting printed somewhat mass-manufactured stuff instead
of one-of-a-kind pieces.

------
BashiBazouk
I really wish they would separate Archival Ink-Jets from the rest of
traditional printmaking. As someone who runs these printers professionally
(trade show , not fine art) and does classic printmaking, I just don't respect
the output the same way. There is craft in printmaking, and in some methods a
limitation on total number of prints possible. Ink jets are mainly making sure
your printer is color calibrated and doing a little color correction while
doing a run. Archival Ink-Jets should be another category priced somewhere
between mass produced posters and original art. It's especially a problem at
art and wine festivals...

------
hesslau
quick question: does anyone know of a service that serves free (as in »free
beer«) art (paintings, photography, illustrations etc.) to download in high
resolution so you can print them yourself?

~~~
contingencies
Not a unified one, however most museums have decent interfaces to their
collections these days. I would highly recommend the Met Museum in New York's
catalog, for instance. Some produce limited resolutions or force you to decode
some kind of image-slicing, but in general you can get super high resolution
copies for free that would be suitable for personal use.

~~~
jedahan
And if you want an api to the met museums art... I made
[http://scrapi.org](http://scrapi.org) . Full disclosure: I work there.

------
sliverstorm
Quick tangential question - What's the best way to shop for nature photography
prints? Most of these sorts of dedicated art stores seem to exclude nature
photography.

~~~
chestnut-tree
Have you seen [http://www.art.com](http://www.art.com) or
[http://www.art.co.uk](http://www.art.co.uk)?

They have a photography section, including "collections" from National
Geographic

~~~
sliverstorm
Honestly? Yes, I'd seen them, but I passed them by quickly for the same reason
I ignore other "perfect" domains like "www.books.com" or
"www.photography.com".

I will take another look.

~~~
minighost
I sell my nature photography: mikewiacek.com :-) Drop me a note and I'll give
you a hackernews price :-)

------
josephjrobison
Have any of you ever purchased fine art or original art online? How was your
experience? I feel like there's a huge gap between people who buy art and
those are online. Namely, a lot of the collectors and old money art buyers who
decorate their mansions tend to have their own system and contacts for buying
art. Of course that's all changing, but I feel like a big chunk of the market
(50-75 year old women) are generally not buying art online.

------
awongh
it's funny that this might be Amazon's solution to s similar set of problems
that Paul Graham wrote about here:
[http://paulgraham.com/bronze.html](http://paulgraham.com/bronze.html)

I wonder if the art market can really be disrupted in this way, or if there's
something intrinsic about buying art in a gallery that makes it
"unamazonable"... (who orders a $10,000 painting online?)

------
BigBalli
I think it's still quite amazing what they're trying to do. This will also
strongly reinforce their perceived value as "secure & legit". I mean, $1M+
Warhol on Amazon?! This is big!
[http://amzn.to/1ctu0w2](http://amzn.to/1ctu0w2) Am I the only one
excited/seeing the potential?

------
icpmacdo
Would something like this actually be painted by Andy Warhol?

[http://www.amazon.com/Muhammed-Ali-
II-180/dp/B00E6HWXRG/ref=...](http://www.amazon.com/Muhammed-Ali-
II-180/dp/B00E6HWXRG/ref=sr_1_20?s=art&ie=UTF8&qid=1375798670&sr=1-20&keywords=warhol)

~~~
GeneralMayhem
No, because that's a screenprint, not a painting.

Snark aside, I would think there are fairly stringent quality controls on
making sure that everything listed (and priced!) as an original actually is.
Amazon's not going to mess around with their reputation when people are
shelling out five (or six, or seven, or...) figures for Warhols.

------
itomatik
FWIW, the most expensive one ($975k) is Helen Frankenthaler's Adirondacks,
1992

[http://www.amazon.com/Adirondacks/dp/B00EBQ4B0Y/ref=sr_1_1?s...](http://www.amazon.com/Adirondacks/dp/B00EBQ4B0Y/ref=sr_1_1?s=art&ie=UTF8&qid=1375842276&sr=1-1)

------
spoiledtechie
Seriously???

Is this a joke?

[http://www.amazon.com/Crease-
Constellation-2/dp/B00E67R24U/r...](http://www.amazon.com/Crease-
Constellation-2/dp/B00E67R24U/ref=sr_1_74?s=collectibles&ie=UTF8&qid=1375798205&sr=1-74&keywords=sculpture)

~~~
jedahan
Probably not easy to cast aluminum to look like crumpled paper. Probably takes
as much time and effort as a week working on a web app.

~~~
JonnieCache
It's cast directly from the paper. It sounds complicated.

[http://www.nesculpture.com/html/specialty.htm](http://www.nesculpture.com/html/specialty.htm)

------
ececconi
If anything, I think this really allows me to see how much art costs. For
example, I find it amazing that I can search through Salvador Dali's works and
buy one of his sketches. I probably won't but I can think of a lot of people
who would.

------
stfu
I was hoping pg would weigh in on the discussion. Didn't he first start out
with trying to convince galleries to start online shops?

------
kwx
Any idea how to approach / sell on here? I'd love to try to get my works up.

------
waxjar
One of those annoying pages that breaks the back button. Hate that.

~~~
GravityWell
Back button seems to work as expected for me in Chrome. And I'm grateful the
site doesn't use an annoying carrousel. I find those things garish.

------
coldcode
The number of $10,000+ art pieces is crazy.

