Why is there such a big difference between some pieces sold at auction?

There are many reasons for this. One of them is that many works, especially those from the 19th century, do not show any kind of quality in their execution. An artist may have a great concept and an interesting way to express themselves, but he or she might lack the skills to translate that into a good piece of art. Similarly, an artist may have all the needed skills to create a beautiful work of art, but have no idea how to convey his/her ideas and thoughts in a coherent manner.

Taste is another factor which plays an important role when works of art are evaluated. It also has some importance when it comes to the prices that works of art can be sold for. Someone might like or dislike a specific artist’s work, or like or dislike a certain style or theme. Ultimately, these “opinions” can become very subjective and therefore difficult to back up with facts – such as provenance or authenticity.

Sometimes it is possible to determine the value of a work of art by researching its provenance; i.e., how it was bought, sold and traded over time (providing that you have all the correct information). However, there are other

The art market is one of the most interesting things in the world. The prices reached by some artists and designers are mind-blowing and, to be honest, sometimes even hard to understand. This also goes for the works that have been sold at auction.

Why do some pieces sell for a lot of money while others don’t? There are many reasons for this, but those who follow the art scene on a regular basis already know what they are.

We’ve put together a list with 5 reasons why some pieces reach very high prices. If you’re interested in finding out more about this topic, here’s a list of 5 things that affect auction prices: 1) Quality, 2) Size, 3) Story/history, 4) Authenticity/provenance, 5) Rarity.

It’s not a crazy question. But the answer is more complicated than you might think. It’s not the artist’s name or the size of the painting. Nor is it the colour or subject matter. In fact, there’s no one thing that makes a painting worth what it sells for at auction.

This is according to art advisor and consultant Richard Polsky, who has spent his career in the art world working with artists, galleries and collectors of all levels. He has appraised over $1 billion worth of art and has been a consultant on many cases involving high profile art frauds and thefts, as well as having conducted provenance research on thousands of works of art.

Polsky says: “The difference between say, a Monet painting that sells for $100m and another that sells for $15m is based upon subtle differences in quality.” The difference isn’t purely in the eye of the beholder either – it can be measured with objective tools such as the Polsky Scale which measures fine art with scientific precision.

He added: “It is easy to look at two pieces of an artist’s work side by side and say ‘I like this better than that’. However, when there are 15 experts in a room discussing these pieces, we will

I’m not an art critic, but I do have a background in computer science and digital art. Here’s my take on why some pieces sell for more than others.

First, let me say that the fact that there’s a market for digital art at all seems to me pretty amazing.

I don’t know any artists who set out to create digital art as a business or commercial endeavor. For many of them, it started off as a personal hobby or interest — and only gradually did they realize that others might be interested.

I think it’s also fair to say that almost everyone who creates digital art is doing it primarily for themselves and not with an eye toward selling it. So when someone does sell their work, it’s usually because they’ve been approached by someone else who is interested in buying it.

This means that the decision of whether or not to sell something is often made by the artist for reasons other than the money involved. It may well be an emotional decision; it may be a decision made in response to another artist being interested in acquiring the work; or perhaps due to a change in circumstances such as moving and needing money, wanting to buy equipment etc..

But whatever the reason, when most artists make this decision they’re thinking about what they

When we think of great art we usually have in mind paintings or sculptures, but photography is also art and can be very expensive. It all comes down to light and composition.

Ansel Adams was a master of this. He used the typical photographic technique of his day, but he also had a deep appreciation for nature and his pictures show this. His photographs are not just pictures of rocks and trees but works of art that would stand out even if they were not photographs.

Example: “Clearing Winter Storm” sold at auction in 2006 for $450,000. The picture shows a clearing in the midst of winter storms with a few rays of sunlight shining through. The image is visible by itself and does not need to be explained by text or captions, which makes it more appealing to collectors all over the world. This photograph is one of the most valuable pieces ever sold at auction and still remains one of the most expensive works of photography in history.

Even an artist like Klimt, who produced so many iconic paintings, can still have a wide variation in the prices of his pieces. Like any artist, he was commissioned to produce various pieces over time. His work can be divided into three stages based on the timeframe and subject matter of his paintings.

In 1890 Klimt began working as an independent artist. Many of his early works were portraits, such as “Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I” (1907) and “Adele Bloch-Bauer II” (1912). These pieces are characterized by gold leaves and heavy patterns of flowers and foliage that cover a majority of the canvas. The canvases from this period are quite large, measuring at least 50 inches in height and 100 inches in length. “Portrait of Mrs. Caecilia Hierta” (1893) is an example of the subject matter during this stage.

Klimt’s later work was less decorative and more naturalistic than his earlier pieces. He moved away from the large canvases to begin painting on a series of smaller pieces such as “The Kiss” (1907) and “Judith” (1908). Subjects included nudes as well as portraits and landscapes. His

As a child, I loved to explore the attic. I spent countless hours looking over old photographs and memorabilia of my parents. One day, I discovered an old box filled with paintings.

I examined each one, wondering who had painted them. With the exception of a few watercolors, the majority of the artwork was done by my great-grandmother. My mother’s mother had painted each one of them.

One painting in particular caught my eye: a bright abstract piece that was unlike the other more traditional works from the same artist. The piece was signed “Dana.” Not knowing what to expect, I turned it over to look for more information on the backside. My heart skipped a beat when I read the signature: “Dana Davenport.”

The connection between my grandmother’s artwork and that of a New York artist by the same name was overwhelming! Had my great-grandmother been an abstract artist in her own right? Why was this never mentioned? Who was this woman?

With questions racing through my mind, I made it my mission to find out everything I could about Dana Davenport, an artist whose work is rarely seen.

It turns out she is a relatively well-known abstract painter who had her first solo