What do you all think? How would you rank them? How much would YOU spend?
The spending does not say a lot about the quality of the pictures. It's all a matter of how much money you have, in fact of
showing how much money you have. Just as the surgeons/lawyers who are walking around with a Leica and shooting with the lens cap on, to a large extend the prices paid for these photos are due to billionaires who want to show off to their fellow one percenters
look, I can AFFORD
to pay this much for a stupid photo!
As for what is art, and what not... that discussion is as old as the hills. No use to repeat all the arguments pro and con.
It's funny that some consider the Steichen picture the most artistic, given that it's value is probably the
least based on its artistic merits, and more on its technical (color, 1904) aspects and the photographer, where the work of Gursky and Sherman was much more valued on the picture itself. In the eyes of the buyer at least.
Then again judging art on its retail value is plain silly.
