3 ms·
> https://mathieustern.darkroom.com/collections/the-cat https://mathieustern.darkroom.com/collections/the-cat I think $96 USD is a lot for a print. I’d pay tha
by codetrotter 3y ago
> https://mathieustern.darkroom.com/collections/the-cat https://mathieustern.darkroom.com/collections/the-cat
I think $96 USD is a lot for a print. I’d pay that much for a limited, numbered, run of photos that he’d developed in the same way as in the video, directly from the glass plate. But not for a scanned print.
- a012 3y agoHe's using darkroom.com's service, I don't know specifically but he'd receive much less than $96/print
- xvedejas 3y agoAnd I personally wouldn't pay any more just because a print was limited. It's almost as if people have different values they assign to products. Shame he didn't consult you before setting his price?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- callalex 3y agoWhat’s the point of limiting the availability of art? Art is meant to create experiences for people, and limiting reproduction is antithetical to that goal. It is useful for gross capitalists that want to seek rent on the human experience though…
- codetrotter 3y agoHe can print as many scanned copies as he wants. I’m just saying that for $96 USD I would not want it to he a scanned print, but a limited direct production. Sell five hundred real ones for $96 USD a piece. And then sell unlimited prints for like $20 USD each or something.
- vasco 3y agoArtists need to eat. And if you make something that everyone can have, it's not art anymore really, it's the equivalent of an ikea frame in an airbnb that looks like every other airbnb.
- lmpdev 3y agoA commodity?
- canadianfella 3y ago[dead]