Cryptoart, Value, and a Cultural Paradigm Shift
“I often create an NFT animation in the form of a video or GIF from the same physical painting that has been or will be sold through the purchase of the 1/1 jpg image. I’ve explained the reasoning behind the 1/1 jpg NFT above but with regards to the animation, in my opinion these are completely different works of art. Through the animation process I am able to create an entirely unique audio-visual experience than from the physical painting or an image of it. These artworks are connected; the painting, the digital image, and the animation but they are all very much unique, independent works of art that together blur the lines between the material and digital art worlds” Trevor Jones Art, Why do I Sell 1/1NFTs tied to my Physical Paintings?
I think there is utility, and value in the relative nature of NFT works, physical works, and floating infinite images. The relation of each medium to the other contributes and augments the ‘value’ of one, from the other, of the whole.
As an artist, creator, maker, the prospect of NFT-isation for the augmentation of the potential value offered of a work to any prospective buyer from my perspective. Art is fundamentally a world constructed by trust and built upon through reputation. Art galleries traditionally managed the relationship — communicating reputation, confidence, and introductions — between artists, their work and collectors/patrons (Trevor Jones); “NFTs largely have the potential to replace traditional art galleries, and how they interact as intermediary” (3D Gallery).
Starting to make art works during this transitional period requires a complex analysis of the potential combination systems that could be employed to augment the value of an art work for a potential buyer or buyers.
For example, I am primarily a photographer, I have works created with digital sensors and 35mm film. There are through this process many potential ‘products’ produced, with the digital process, I shoot in a RAW format (.CR2), edit and export to a more universal image format (usually .JPG). They’re then either printed, posted somewhere online, or languish in folders on my harddrive. With film, there is the developed film, scans, and often also prints too.
The problem as an artist is in attempting to decide what is valuable between the different representations of the artwork, in essence, what is the artwork, or where is the art work. In this, I think there are different orders of value represented by NFTart, regular images, and physical works. As a kind of mirror to a traditional idea of value in gold, a currency, and something you can eat.
A criticism I have faced in conversation about this area with people I know is where the difference in value lies between any image, and it’s NFT. Which makes sense on one level as a ‘user’ of images, but not on another level as a ‘collector’ of images. There is a sense in which you ‘own’ the images you’ve downloaded from the internet, and another sense in which you do not. There is a sense in which you ‘own’ the image through representative connection as produced by collaborative confidence and trust as encoded by an NFT, and a sense in which you do not.
I think this is a level of analysis problem, in that it is in some capacity qualitatively different to own an original of a painting than a print of the same painting. This still, I do not think quite reach close enough to the issue, there is an objective qualitative difference between the painting and it’s representational print. A much better representation of the NFT/any other jpeg comparison is in traditional photographic prints runs, special editions, original prints, signed editions, etc.
What is the qualitative difference between any two prints of a specific edition, or between any one of them, and one of a different edition, other than their ‘meta’ characteristics? And within that frame what is the qualitative difference between an NFT of an image, or any other representations of that image.
The representations are very much connected, artworks can be represented in many forms, the original, in digital, and in represented objects and situations. The independent works of art create an assemblage of multiple diverse elements, “that together blur the lines between the material and digital art worlds.” The existence and development of tokenised art in my view simple completes the spectrum along which an artwork can exist. From the 1/1 original representation, through any other physical representation, various digital representations, to a 1/1 digital representation.
This is a paradigm shifting change to the structure of society, the potential of the underlying technology driving the NFT art revolution is still being explored and revolutionised. The Christie’s auction of NFT work, most specficially this Beeple work, at time of writing at a 9.75m USD bid with just under 24hrs remaining.
I believe that the end of this auction will signal a sea-change in the structure of the art world, casting a tidal wave across social discourse surrounding the nature of digital objects, ownership, rights management, and the place for ‘trusted third-party institutions’ within society more broadly.
People say politics is downstream of culture, well I’d say culture is driven by creative production and distribution. Christie’s legitimising the existence and utility of NFT related artworks is an event of paradigm shifting proportions.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is a 1962 book of Thmas Kuhn, an American philosopher of science. He examines Scientific Revolutions throughout history, and argues that science does not progress via a linear accumulation of new knowledge but undergoes paradigm shifts, in which the nature of scientific inquiry within a particular field is abruptly transformed.
I think in general this idea can be applied to any situation which exists on a set of axioms and progresses along the lines of these axioms. A structural revolution in this framework is a shift in the application or basis of the axioms, the point of which being defined as a ‘paradigm shift’, this is what I propose is occurring within the art world, the further proposition extends that the existence of a structural revolution through a period of liminal exploration within the boundaries of a shifting paradigm has cascading effects upon the culture at large. The world is changing, and I think we are clearly now at a precipice, like a stock chart however, is this simply a small correction before a continued soar, or is the inflection upon which all structures could be reconfigured.
I would consider the potential existence of an event of black swan properties, requires significant further investigation and consideration of ‘useful’ positions, and the rapid abandonment of ‘useless’ positions.
