Business

Brace Yourself…the Most Expensive Photo Ever Sells at Auction for…

Photograph Sells at Christies for $4.3 M Breaks Most Expensive Photograph Record

Record-setting photograph sale at Christies. (Photo: Angreas Gursky/Christie's Images, Ltd., 2011)

Stripes of like greys and green compose this photo. The grey of the sky, water and sidewalk are broken up by the horizontal stripes of kelly green grass. To use artistic terms, you could say the photograph by Andreas Gursky is minimalist, understated, carries mournful notes.

But can you guess how much this photo sold for at Christie’s auction house? Even if you aimed high and said $1 million, you’d be shooting too low. Try $4.3 million. According to Wired, this set a new record at Christie’s for most expensive photo. The previous record holder was Cindy Sherman’s “Untitled #96” for $3.89 million.

Wired has more:

Those unfamiliar with Gursky may be wondering: What’s so special about a picture of a river and some grass? What elevates that photo above so many others? And how did the price get so astronomically high?

Well, for one thing, it’s not uncommon for a Gursky to sell for millions of dollars. His piece 99 Cnet II Diptychon at right also broke records when it was auctioned off for $3.3 million. Also, Gursky is akin to a painter in the way he creates surreal scenes through stitching, and digital manipulation and only makes very limited prints of each work. People are usually less surprised by these types of prices for works by en vogue painters.

Francis Outred, Head of Christie’s Post War and Contemporary Art Department in Europe, says that size and technique also factored in. “Working on an unprecedented scale with outstanding printing techniques and color and grain definition to challenge painting, he has led a group of artists who have re-defined the medium in culture today,” he says.

Another factor appears to be the piece’s rarity. “Of the edition of six, three are in public museums (Moma, Tate, Pinakothek der Moderne, Munich), one is with a private museum (Glenstone, Potomac) and only two are left in private collections, of which this is one. In other words this is almost as rare as a one-off painting,” says Outred.

Like all expensive pieces of art, this one even comes with its own bit of controversy. Wired reports an unnamed art gallery professional as saying the high price seems like trending ploy by photographers to drive up costs for their work to brand themselves as “artists.”

How much would you have paid for this photo?

[H/T: Hot Air]

Comments (250)

1 2 3 ... 8
  • BonnieBlueFlag
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 1:10am

    Apparently I’m in the wrong business.

    Report Post » BonnieBlueFlag  
    • Brooke Lorren
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 1:36am

      I might pay $.25 for it. I think that I could take an almost identical picture myself, if I was near a river and a field. I’ve taken a few similar pictures myself.

      Report Post »  
    • Kaoscontrol
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 2:45am

      Why are any of us suprised? These are the same rich idiots that gave a Nobel prize to Al Gore and the POTUS. This print is only worth 4.3 million because some schmuck was willing to pay that much.

      Report Post » Kaoscontrol  
    • freedomofspeech
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 3:27am

      no doubt, boy those 1% know how to spend money.

      Report Post »  
    • coindexter
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 3:43am

      c’mon folks…it’s a picture of zucotti park before the protests. the “after” picture will be worth billions. the 4.2 mill will probably be donated to OWS.

      Report Post »  
    • Marci
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 3:50am

      Considering the digital manipulation mentioned, any of us could “take” that photo.

      Report Post » Marci  
    • RabidPatriot
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 5:05am

      I have deleted better photos than that one to make room for good photos.

      Report Post » RabidPatriot  
    • Islesfordian
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 5:51am

      The valuation of “art” these days is very similar to the valuation of the international economy.

      Report Post » Islesfordian  
    • decendentof56
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 6:19am

      Baht….Dah-dee, I whont it. I whont that pickcha, and I whant it right now. ………Yes, Verouka.

      Report Post »  
    • Cat
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 6:25am

      Paid 50¢ for something similar at a yard sale
      Merely spreading the wealth around

      Report Post » Cat  
    • Bluefish49
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 6:35am

      Looks like he was on the back nine deing held up by a slow group and decide to take a picture of the cart path and pond….I need to rememeber to take my camera with me this Sunday.

      Report Post »  
    • loriann12
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 6:46am

      It says it was digitally stitched together, so it’s not even a real photograph. What a crock.

      Report Post »  
    • sumguyinohio
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 6:47am

      Umm…I have a few of my last vacation where it rained the entire week. You all can have them.

      Report Post » sumguyinohio  
    • JJ Coolay
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 6:57am

      What a sham the art industry is.
      I’ve seen paintings sell for upper 6 figures that looks like a 2nd grader painted it.
      WTH is wrong with people?

      Report Post » JJ Coolay  
    • seldomscene
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 7:14am

      I don’t know about art but, I think it is upside down.

      Report Post » seldomscene  
    • libertyerdeath
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 7:25am

      COPY… PASTE… PRINT… I‘m a freakin’ millionaire!!!!

      Report Post »  
    • GUT_CHECK
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 7:36am

      LOOKS LIKE “TELETUBBIES LONDON”
      to me

      Report Post »  
    • tracer14
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 7:59am

      $ for this? Anyone checking for money laundering ploy? I’ve thrown away better pictures that this!

      Report Post »  
    • pollyanna
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 8:08am

      No doubt…shall we say, “who’s the sucker?”

      Report Post » pollyanna  
    • bitter.clinger
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 8:19am

      …whoever the sucker was that bought this needs to read that “Emperor’s New Clothes” story…sucka.

      Report Post »  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 8:47am

      “Well, for one thing, it’s not uncommon for a Gursky to sell for millions of dollars.”

      Translation: People with more dollars than sense are trying to impress their neighbors by having an ‘exclusive’ item that, were it from anybody else, would be in the trash with “my 2 year old son must have gotten ahold of the camera”. This kind of thing always amuses me, and I’m not innocent of preying upon it with people in the market (used to deal in antique paper ephemera). A fool and his money are soon parted, and the sooner the better I say.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • @leftfighter
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 9:06am

      You wouldn’t be able to sell it for this much. Only those in the artsy fartsy community would pay that much for someone in the arsty fartsy community’s picture.

      For you and I it’s a wasted shot that gets thrown away, not artistry.

      Report Post » @leftfighter  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 9:16am

      Islesfordian

      “The valuation of “art” these days is very similar to the valuation of the international economy.’
      _____________________________________________________________________________

      Lots of truthful quotes by readers, but that has to be the money quote for this article.

      Report Post »  
    • cessna152
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 9:43am

      Is this “artist” going to share the wealth with the rest of us?

      Report Post » cessna152  
    • Brizz
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 9:43am

      Gursky is one of my favorite photogs!
      Why am I not surprised to see so many philistines leaving evidence of their ignorance within their comments.
      And I thought people here were capitalist.
      Check out some of his work.
      http://www.google.com/search?q=andreas+gursky&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&prmd=imvnsuo&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=YHrCTqDGDoKH2AWPnqnqDg&ved=0CD0QsAQ&biw=1392&bih=780&sei=dnrCTqnTG-js2AXazOXTDg

      Report Post » Brizz  
    • Americanius
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 10:11am

      Why would I pay for it? I’m looking at it for free right now.
      BTW, does this site’s use of the photo constitute fair use or is it copyright infringement?

      Report Post »  
    • db321
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 11:28am

      A fool and his money is soon parted.

      Report Post » db321  
    • Welcome Black Carter
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 11:53am

      I’ve seen better photos on novelty toilet paper.

      Report Post » Welcome Black Carter  
    • drphil69
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:44pm

      How is this any different than a schmuck that throws paint against a canvas? (“modern” art)

      I think the person that paid it is an idiot, but then again I don’t have a spare $4 million to blow…

      Report Post »  
    • NOBAMA201258
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 2:30pm

      Pic looks like one you would see in a motel 6 or econo lodge with apologies to both!

      Report Post »  
    • Quagmir
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 2:56pm

      pay? right click – save picture as..

      If I were in the Obama Admin I could claim I saved the taxpayers 4.3 Million and saved 30 jobs.

      Report Post » Quagmir  
    • Nathaniel Horn
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 3:14pm

      No doubt it’s just one more sign of the plunging value and respect for money. Can the crash of the dollar be far off? Every bubble ends with the once valuable commodity being as common and just as accessible as sand. One stockbroker in ‘29 wrote that he knew it was over when shoe shine boys began giving stock buying tips. Brave new world- here we come…

      Report Post » Nathaniel Horn  
    • Sheepdog911
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 3:37pm

      Wouldn‘t it be a lot cheaper to simply the copy that’s posted here? There, I just saved $4,300,000.00 dollars and a lot of embarrassment for wasting so much money.

      Report Post » Sheepdog911  
    • Komponist-ZAH
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 5:10pm

      Well…..it’s pleasing to my eyes, but $4.3 million??? Does this Gursky guy work for the government?

      And technically a photograph isn’t art. Sorry, photography lovers.

      Report Post »  
    • jollylama
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 5:11pm

      It‘s not being the ’best’ that counts.. it‘s being the ’best seller’

      Report Post »  
    • VegasGuy
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 6:00pm

      A big, fat zilch.

      Report Post » VegasGuy  
    • BloodSweatandTears
      Posted on December 31, 2011 at 2:50pm

      Could it be $$$ laundering….?

      Report Post »  
  • JoshR
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 1:08am

    $4.3 Million???? Sucker…. I got it for free… see above. lol

    Report Post »  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 1:57am

      exactly :P

      Report Post »  
    • Starkadder
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 2:09am

      Bwaa hahaha HA!

      Report Post » Starkadder  
    • goofyfoot2001
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 5:47am

      The value of a dollar is obviously, totally subjective.

      Report Post »  
    • lukerw
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 8:00am

      I have views like this every day from my home… in the window behind my Computer Desk… which are much better and vary each day.

      Report Post » lukerw  
  • WhiteFang
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:56am

    This is an outrage!

    Report Post » WhiteFang  
  • Locke
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:53am

    Quote :

    Also, Gursky is akin to a painter in the way he creates surreal scenes through stitching, and digital manipulation and only makes very limited prints of each work.

    So wait…you‘re telling me a photoshop’d picture of grass sold for almost $5 mil? Hell I do that all the time and post it for free on the internet. Maybe the person who bought it needs the digital image of a horses a@@ stitched to his head…how much does that go for?

    Report Post » Locke  
    • earthbonz
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 1:05am

      ……trying….to ….catch my breath……..bahhahahahaha. Excellent comment!

      Report Post » earthbonz  
    • texanpatriot
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 1:17am

      The post and Earthbonz’ comment are almost as funny as the guy who paid this sum for a photoshop. LOL

      Report Post » texanpatriot  
    • lylejk
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 1:59am

      Do retouching myself Locke; this is pretty much outrageous. Well, maybe because I am more then a tad jealous. lol

      :)

      Report Post » lylejk  
  • knighttemplar999
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:51am

    You have to understand the mind of the rich. They are very petty, superficial people. They must have something others don’t have, no matter how trivial or asinine.

    Report Post »  
    • TEXASGRANNY73
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 6:38am

      Bet it was Al Gore and his go green climate change (he got plenty rich) who bought it. However if I got paid by one of those petty superficial people then I would be rich and then I would be rich and petty and superficial. People who are not rich therefore cannot be rich or petty and superficial?

      Report Post »  
    • Cat
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 7:55am

      Not so fast Grandma, sometimes it’s not superficial, or petty …
      In 1970, an antique vehicle restorer paid me $1,500.00 for an old Florida tag
      He just finished restoring a 1941 Ford pickup, but with V8 Windsor power.
      The tag was the only 1941 Florida tag ‘w-1941’
      He thought it was a bargain
      I used the money to buy a 1970 Triumph Bonneville TR150 RT, one of only 500 – twin 750cc motorcycles Triumph ever made
      It’s still in the crate and is worth around $30,000
      His truck is now worth about $50,000
      It’s only money

      Report Post » Cat  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 9:06am

      @Knight

      Yes, precisely. This is the “everyman” equivalent of buying the latest name brand “whatever” because it’s cool and gives you prestige amongst your group of friends.

      Art transcends reason, or rather, people’s reaction to art sometimes makes no sense. Not supposed to I guess, but things like this are clear cases of Muffy stomping her foot and demanding that Tad buy the photo so she can show it off to the other Matrons in her circle of friend and brag about her exclusivity amongst them.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
  • jamjat54
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:47am

    I would have taken that money and used it to travel to wherever this picture was taken and done it for myself. Seriously, they only pay this much because of the ‘packaging’, the buzz words, the ‘arty’ types who are hyping it. What a waste of money.

    I’d pay up to $40 depending on the type of frame it came in. Oh second thought, never mind. I really don’t like it $40 worth.

    Report Post »  
  • paperpushermj
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:45am

    How much would I pay for the photo depends on what else in that National Geographic Issue

    Report Post » paperpushermj  
    • Cat
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 6:51am

      Don’t waiste your time with National Geographic …
      Goggle ‘Met-Art’

      Report Post » Cat  
  • cdavis2009
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:45am

    As photographer, this photo is infuriating. Anyone could take it with a tripod, a cheapo point-and-shoot and automatic settings.

    Report Post »  
    • TunaBlue
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 1:01am

      My son is a photographer, and he said he wouldn’t wipe his…well, you get the point. It ALMOST makes me believe we should tax the rich at 95%, if this is what they’re going to do with their money. Just kidding.

      Report Post »  
    • Brooke Lorren
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 1:43am

      I’m not a professional photographer, but I do sell my photographs on posters, postcards magnets, etc. If I had a photo like this, I wouldn’t bother turning it into a postcard unless I put some lettering in front of it – it’s too boring.

      Report Post »  
    • Brizz
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 9:56am

      As a photographer, you’re probably full of it. If Gursky’s image makes you mad, you should be outraged by Cindy Sherman’s feminazi crap selling for almost as much.

      Report Post » Brizz  
  • CatB
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:42am

    I think I am going to get myself an agent .. I already have a camera! IT is all marketing!

    Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 9:55am

      You would have to come tom that conclusions after the 60 minutes expose showing artists selling blank canvasses

      Report Post »  
  • symphonic
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:35am

    It is nothing more than a MONEY LAUNDERING SCAM, and the artist is getting kickbacks by funneling the money thru his account. Watch where the money goes. Probably drug money.

    Report Post » symphonic  
    • InversionTheory
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 7:28am

      That’s a brilliant idea. I bet the Mafia thought of it first, though… If they existed, I mean. ;-)

      Report Post »  
  • Lara
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:21am

    I am an Equine Artist and my art is extremely hard to find as there are hardly any prints of it anywhere and I own the originals. I have been featured live on TV about my work and a few originals are in Kentucky Derby winning Owner’s collections. My art has featured, Secretariat, Wyatt Earp, Sunday Silence, Native American’s and their war horses, Seattle Slew, Smarty Jones, Affirmed, Azeri, War Emblem, ect. But yet, the price of my work is no where near a hang nail of this boring pic! I also have won multiple awards and hung in many prestigious shows. WOrk in oils, watercolor, acrylic, colored pencils, charcoal, and even sculpt! This makes me sick. I have been an artist for over 30 years and this is what happens! Such a backwards world. Satan can go lick an electric socket for all I care!

    Report Post » Lara  
    • tersky
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:37am

      Agreed. I would call this photo a naked emperor.

      Report Post »  
    • CatB
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:41am

      Many people will buy what someone “tells” them is art … often times it is the “cr*p” that makes the most money .. a sucker born every minute.

      Report Post »  
    • tersky
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:44am

      CATB. Yep. That‘s why I’d call this a naked emperor.

      Report Post »  
    • TEXASGRANNY73
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 6:51am

      Maybe you will be discovered after you are gone like Vincent van Gogh. Or is it all about the money? Just funnin but one man‘s trash is another man’s treasure.

      Report Post »  
    • LastAmerican
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 8:36am

      I would much rather have one of your pictures with a beautiful horse than that drab.
      I am sorry but that’s not art. There is definitely something nefarious going on. I‘ll bet it’s George Soros’s favorite picture.

      Report Post »  
    • Cat
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 9:15am

      Don’t feel bad Lara …

      Live in an ‘art’ community and it’s that time of year again when the waterfront is lined with ‘art’
      All of it is either ‘safe-art’ or piles of metal, more commonly known by the observers as garbage
      Hell, some of my quick sketches of buildings are more tasteful.

      Report Post » Cat  
  • Michael
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:14am

    It’s a photo!! what would stop the “artist” from just printing more? Reminds me of the idiots paying over $500 for that princess di beanie baby, a few months later TY just made more.

    Report Post » Michael  
  • JSnake
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:14am

    This is not art, it is digital graphics.
    A photograph that is “manipulated” should never be compared to a Rembrandt, Monet or any other true work of art.

    Report Post »  
  • Jake Wilde
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:14am

    I could top that photo with my Galaxy S II!

    Report Post »  
  • twistin
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:10am

    $5.oo

    Report Post »  
  • stratomaster
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:03am

    What a load of crap! Whoever bought this is the dumbest human being on the planet. Next time try donating the money to a kids charity or something you idiot.

    Report Post »  
    • desertspeaks
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:10am

      michael moore bought a photo??

      Report Post » desertspeaks  
    • ReallyAUnionGuy
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:13am

      Not that I would spend my hard earned green backs on art, I do appreciate it, and a good picture as well as a good painting can be inspiring or relaxing. This a photograph of a beautiful scene, I wish I knew where it was. If someone has that much money to spend on the photo, then great for the photographer, even greater for the person who bought it. That money will trifle through many lives, the photographer and his family and all the merchants he or she will visits, not to mention the auction house and its employees, and the delivery trucks, and framers who frame it, the guy who hangs it….and on and on and on, this is how free market capitalism works, cud’s to the photographer and the person who bought it. And before you go jumping on my name and assuming my liberal sensibilities, you would be wrong….check it out for yourself………

      http://www.firefightersforfreedom.blogspot.com

      Report Post »  
    • chrisden
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:15am

      WOW, the buyer is an idiot. Everything that is produced today is dumbed down. The person who bought this is clueless on what good art is and should be. Come on, my kids take better pictures. Just because you call it minimalist and sell only a few copies doesn’t mean it has any value. Geeeeez.

      Report Post »  
    • symphonic
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:36am

      The buyer is not an idiot, but a money launderer, and the artist gets say, a million for his photo, and the buyer gets 3 million back.

      Report Post » symphonic  
    • outrider
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 11:05am

      Strato, whoever bought this joke of a pic is so rich he has no idea of the value of anything. Maybe he so lacks “grounding” in his personal life that he was drawn to a picture of … wait for it… generic ground.

      One thing I know for sure about him is that he never dug a ditch for a living, or performed life-saving surgery, or worked as a roofer in the hot sun. He’s never done any meaningful work, or he would have a better sense of the value of money, and probably enough personal security and self respect that he would laugh at anyone trying to market this junk art.

      Must be nice though, to be so rich that you forget that a rich fool is still a fool.

      Report Post »  
  • banjarmon
    Posted on November 15, 2011 at 12:00am

    WOW!!!! I just right click …. copy ….and have it for FREE………………..

    not…….Clean sweep TEA 2012

    Report Post » banjarmon  
  • KarenKat
    Posted on November 14, 2011 at 11:57pm

    some people have to much dollars and not enough sense….

    Report Post » KarenKat  
  • circleDwagons
    Posted on November 14, 2011 at 11:51pm

    some people have way to much money. i don’t know any of these people. if i had 4 mil to spend on a picture. i wouldn’t the dollar must not be worth very much.

    Report Post » circleDwagons  
  • Kess
    Posted on November 14, 2011 at 11:48pm

    You’ve got to be kidding me. I could have done that and probably given it way. Michelangelo was an artist; this is the result of some guy with a camera….

    Report Post » Kess  
  • tnalp
    Posted on November 14, 2011 at 11:48pm

    I guess I’m going to show my redneck and say “I think it’s a piece of crap”. I don’t know who paid that much for that photograph, but they must be very proud and stupid. You know when you’re loading film and have to advance the film to get to the first real frame and keep snapping the shutter to get there, pointing the camera every which way. That is what this photo looks like.

    Report Post »  
  • PointBlankReality
    Posted on November 14, 2011 at 11:48pm

    I say if somebody has that much money to spend on a photo, well…. I must have made some bad career choices….

    Report Post »  
  • Maxim Crux
    Posted on November 14, 2011 at 11:48pm

    Looking at it, it reminds me of the empty brain of a liberal…possibly of the one that bought it.

    Report Post »  
  • AOL_REFUGEE
    Posted on November 14, 2011 at 11:47pm

    I’d have paid fifty bucks for it.

    By the way, wtf is a “one-off” of anything, anyway? Isn’t it referring to a “one-of-a-kind”, in which case it should be a “one-OF“ and not a ”one-OFF”? Why I hate that “one-off” expression.

    Report Post » AOL_REFUGEE  
    • nappy
      Posted on November 15, 2011 at 1:58am

      It‘s enough to tick one off isn’t it?

      Report Post »  
  • oldschoolgreen
    Posted on November 14, 2011 at 11:40pm

    stupid should hurt

    Report Post »  
1 2 3 ... 8

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love