Classic 'Macintosh' Painting by Andy Warhol Estimated to Fetch Up to $30,000 at Auction Next Month

Discussion in 'Mac Blog Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jan 18, 2018.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    Woodshed Art Auctions has announced it will be auctioning an opaque watercolor painting of Apple's classic logo by the late Andy Warhol next month.

    [​IMG]

    The painting is part of Warhol's "Ads" collection from 1985, one year after the original Macintosh launched. It features Apple's old rainbow logo, which the company used from 1977 to 1998, between Apple and Macintosh word marks.

    The painting measures eight inches squared inside a 16.5-inch squared frame, and it is signed by Warhol on the front and back. It is said to be in "very good condition" with archival corners and no adhesives touching the artwork.

    While a similar Macintosh canvas painting by Warhol sold for $900,000 at a recent Sotheby's auction, this gouache painting is on paper, so it is seemingly less valuable. Still, it is estimated to fetch between $20,000 and $30,000.

    Warhol, who passed away in 1987, was a famous artist known for his paintings of iconic American items like Coca-Cola and Campbell's Soup, and celebrities including Marilyn Monroe, Elvis Presley, and Muhammad Ali.

    Live bidding opens on the Woodshed Art Auctions website on February 1 at 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time, with a minimum bid of $5,000.

    Article Link: Classic 'Macintosh' Painting by Andy Warhol Estimated to Fetch Up to $30,000 at Auction Next Month
     
  2. DocMultimedia macrumors 6502

    DocMultimedia

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2012
    Location:
    Charlottesville, VA
  3. ArtOfWarfare macrumors G3

    ArtOfWarfare

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2007
    #3
    I got a nice painting of a cow I bought for $8 the other day. No idea who drew it, but between the painting I have and this one, I vastly prefer the cow painting, and that's before even factoring in price.

    There's no accounting for some people's (complete lack of) taste.

    Like, honestly, what the heck does someone buying this think? That they're going to be able to go on to sell it for more later on? That requires there being someone not just as dumb (and wealthy) as you, but even dumber and wealthier. It's going to come to an end eventually - how can the buyer be so certain that they're not the dumbest person, the one at the end of the chain?

    Or is it possible to have enough money to impulsively spend $30K on a painting? I guess that'd require having a net worth of around... $3B or so*, for $30K to seem like a small enough purchase to just impulsively do it.

    * Because at that point, you're making enough interest that within a few hours your net worth has increased by $30K.
     
  4. keysofanxiety macrumors G3

    keysofanxiety

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    #4
    Looks like a kid with a crimson crayon drew this (after having eaten all the other colours).

    Still, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I'm far from an art critic.
     
  5. macduke macrumors G3

    macduke

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Location:
    Central U.S.
    #5
    If I were Tim, I'd have this hanging in my new office.
     
  6. neliason macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    #6
    I am reminded of the fable The Emperor’s New Clothes. What people appreciate as art sometimes baffles me. I realize personal taste is a factor. But I just can’t see anyone paying much for this. There isn’t much in the painting itself. What you are buying is the fact that it was crafted by a particular person. In that sense it is more like autograph or personal relic collecting.
     
  7. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    [​IMG]

    Not a huge fan of Warhol myself, but for those who are, think of it as 150 shares of AAPL. Not a massive sum by any means and certainly in reach of someone worth far less than billions. Art collectors aren't really any more impulsive than anyone else. They know that fine art value doesn't come "to an end," it tends to increase.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 18, 2018 ---
    That's just the thing with art, you don't have to understand why something is appreciated by someone else but not you.

    I bet this piece sells for more than the high end of the estimate.
     
  8. -Garry- macrumors 6502a

    -Garry-

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #8
    I tell you now, this will go for a lot more than $30,000. Mark my words.
     
  9. smacrumon macrumors 68030

    smacrumon

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    #9
    This painting is certainly worth much more than $30000. I suspect it will go much higher than that.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 18, 2018 ---
    Twins!
     
  10. PG(Austin) macrumors regular

    PG(Austin)

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #10
    I'm in the wrong business. I could do this easily....but as someone said above, you are buying the name of the artist. Which makes absolutely no sense to me. Why do people want things created by weirdos?
     
  11. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #11
    Stop to consider how this gives all of us hope.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 18, 2018 ---
    Triplets, actually. And FWIW I made that prediction first. ;)
     
  12. Nunyabinez macrumors 68000

    Nunyabinez

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Provo, UT
    #12
    Hanging on the basement wall of a not insignificant number of MacRumors posters.

    [​IMG]
     
  13. lunarworks macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    #13
    "l could have made this."
    "Then why didn't you?"
     
  14. smacrumon macrumors 68030

    smacrumon

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    #14
    My family!
     
  15. Starship67 macrumors 6502a

    Starship67

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2017
    Location:
    LA
    #15
    Thats not something I Would have admitted on a public forum. /S
     
  16. Joe Rossignol Editor

    Joe Rossignol

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2012
    Location:
    Toronto
    #16
    I know nothing about this, but the other canvas one linked in article was estimated at $600K and sold for $900K!
     
  17. scott911 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    #17
    i agree. several times over.
     
  18. cpfoto2005 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    #18

    "Here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers…"
     
  19. Spendlove macrumors 6502

    Spendlove

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2015
    Location:
    Cambridge UK
    #19
    I really like it.

    Can someone lend me $30,000? I will let you visit to look at it from time to time.
     
  20. ArtOfWarfare macrumors G3

    ArtOfWarfare

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2007
    #20
    Interesting to compare it to stock. There's a bunch of major differences:
    #1 - It's easy to buy and sell stocks, and to see what the going rate for it is at any point, because thousands (or millions or billions) of people have shares that are identical to yours.
    #2 - Many stocks will earn you dividends.
    #3 - If a company tanks, you can liquidate it and get the value of whatever property they owned.

    None of these apply to art.

    I think that's a reasonable bet, given a nearly identical piece went for 30x as much. My concern would be that this person intends to hold onto it for years before selling it. Apple's brand value is already going down - seems like it's only a matter of time before the art depicting their brand similarly declines in value.
     
  21. guzhogi, Jan 18, 2018
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2018

    guzhogi macrumors 68030

    guzhogi

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Location:
    Wherever my feet take me…
    #21
    I know. I find that with a lot of art, it's not the art itself, but the painter. If they said that my sister's 6 year old daughter painted this, it might go for a few bucks. Yet, if you put a kindergartener's art project in the Louvre and said that it's by some famous artist, people would pay thousands of dollars for it.
     
  22. arkitect macrumors 603

    arkitect

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Location:
    Bath, United Kingdom
    #22
    Actually? No. They won't.

    Next time you're standing in front of a Van Gogh. have a good look.

    That is not "kindergarten" art… and could never be mistaken for it.

    Now, Tracey Emin stuff on the other hand… "Look Mum, I messed up mah bed!"
     
  23. guzhogi macrumors 68030

    guzhogi

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Location:
    Wherever my feet take me…
    #23
    Okay, maybe not Van Gogh, but some other famous painter/artist. Just trying to say that sometimes people pay for the name over the actual work.
     
  24. warholron macrumors newbie

    warholron

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    #24
    This is 100% FAKE. The signature is way off. |Everything about this is wrong. Can't believe an auction house would market a fake and not do the basic research like buying the $50 catalogue raisonne which would spell out all the stamps, numbering, etc.
     
  25. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #25
    Art auction estimates tend to be conservative, which is my only reason for predicting that this piece will go for more than $30k.
     

Share This Page