4 ms·

Except the real value is in the painting. If it were destroyed, then the certificate would be worthless. If the certificate were destroyed, you could have exper

by goda90 5y ago

Except the real value is in the painting. If it were destroyed, then the certificate would be worthless. If the certificate were destroyed, you could have experts inspect the painting to see how old it is and compare minor defects to those found in duplicates to show its authenticity. No one would want to buy the certificate from you but let you keep the painting in your vaults

imgabe 5y ago
> Except the real value is in the painting. If it were destroyed, then the certificate would be worthless. Not true. Banksy sold a painting for $1.4 million and it shredded itself right after the auction ended. Three years later the shredded remains (presumably with the certificate of authenticity) sold for $25.4 million[1]. So, no, the value is not in an intact painting. Forgers can artificially age paintings. It's amazing the lengths they go to. Maybe something like Starry Night has been analyzed enough that it could be verified, but other works are not. It's not really known how many works of art on the market are forgeries. > No one would want to buy the certificate from you but let you keep the painting in your vaults Actually people do this all the time. They pay millions upon millions of dollars for a work of art and it gets loaned to a museum and possibly sent all over the world. They still own it though. There's also freeports[2] around the world with warehouses full of art. You can buy an artwork and it never moves from the warehouse, just the record of who owns it changes. [1] https://nypost.com/2021/10/14/shredded-banksy-artwork-could-fetch-millions-at-auction/ https://nypost.com/2021/10/14/shredded-banksy-artwork-could-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_economic_zone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_economic_zone
- hammyhavoc 5y ago
  Banksy is gimmicky. The value of art is art. If we disagree then you are admitting that both the art world and crypto are heavily used for money laundering.
  - imgabe 5y ago
    Of course art is heavily used for money laundering. Nobody ever claimed otherwise. That is a simple fact and has nothing to do with what we’re talking about. Nothing that you claim about value is going to change the fact that art is used for money laundering.

by goda90 5y ago

imgabe 5y ago

> Except the real value is in the painting. If it were destroyed, then the certificate would be worthless. Not true. Banksy sold a painting for $1.4 million and it shredded itself right after the auction ended. Three years later the shredded remains (presumably with the certificate of authenticity) sold for $25.4 million[1]. So, no, the value is not in an intact painting. Forgers can artificially age paintings. It's amazing the lengths they go to. Maybe something like Starry Night has been analyzed enough that it could be verified, but other works are not. It's not really known how many works of art on the market are forgeries. > No one would want to buy the certificate from you but let you keep the painting in your vaults Actually people do this all the time. They pay millions upon millions of dollars for a work of art and it gets loaned to a museum and possibly sent all over the world. They still own it though. There's also freeports[2] around the world with warehouses full of art. You can buy an artwork and it never moves from the warehouse, just the record of who owns it changes. [1] https://nypost.com/2021/10/14/shredded-banksy-artwork-could-fetch-millions-at-auction/ https://nypost.com/2021/10/14/shredded-banksy-artwork-could-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_economic_zone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_economic_zone

hammyhavoc 5y ago
Banksy is gimmicky. The value of art is art. If we disagree then you are admitting that both the art world and crypto are heavily used for money laundering.
- imgabe 5y ago
  Of course art is heavily used for money laundering. Nobody ever claimed otherwise. That is a simple fact and has nothing to do with what we’re talking about. Nothing that you claim about value is going to change the fact that art is used for money laundering.