Rhien II – Andreas Gursky

Owner - anonymous

In 1999 German visual artist Andreas Gursky took this photo of the Rheine River. In 2011 a three meter wide pint of the image mounted on acrylic glass sold at Christie’s New York for a record 4.3 million dollars; making it the most expensive photograph ever sold.

Two things came to mind when I read this. First of all, I am seriously concidering changing my occupation to “Visual Artist”. And secondly, how much disposable income do you need before you are comfortable spending 4.3 million dollars on a photograph?

This could be the very definition of what has come to be known as “Frist world problems.” 

However, as an artist myself, I felt compelled to put own my thoughts on the nature of photography and art as I do think it plays a significant role in our society.

I think this is a significant image because it says something about the nature of Fine Art Photography.

Since the first very photographers began to capture images in the early 1800s, they fought for acknowledgement from other artists and those in the art world as to whether their work should be considered legitimate art. I can say from personal experience that this battle still goes on today. With the recent proliferation of digital photography there is a very real feeling among some, including traditional film photographers, that digital photography does not require any real skill at all. Making me feel that my work is sometimes looked on as being in the same category as glow in the dark paintings on black velvet.

I was once asked by a fellow photographer what I would say to those who don’t see photography as art. My response was that I would say nothing. Personally, why would I try to persuade anyone how they should feel about art? It is completely subjective. What each of us feels when they experience any kind of art is as personal as it gets. Whether you prefer a multi-million dollar image of the Rhine River or some kind of whimsical picture of a precocious kitten that you saw on the internet; we all like what we like when it comes to the appreciation of art in all of its forms. I would never attempt to defend my work or attempt to persuade anyone who does not connect with it. I just don’t think it works that way.

I am forced to wonder however, if can make that next image that will make millions of dollars. I have a real passion for what I do, which would make it all the sweeter if I could figure out how to make a living at it too. One of the real up-sides of being an artist is having people compliment your work. It is even better when they want to give you money for it. Any artist who says that the money side of it does not matter is either a liar, a fool or is so self-conscious that they don’t want to be perceived as greedy.

As for Andreas Gursky. I say, good for him. I am not sure I would have a burning desire to hang that piece on my wall, but it matters not. It is a legitimate work of art regardless of what it sold for.  

For what it is worth, the person or persons who loved the image so much that they will willing to shell out 4.3 million dollars for it, remains anonymous.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/8884829/Why-is-Andreas-Gurskys-Rhine-II-the-most-expensive-photograph.html