/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6383282
#1: Digital art is not real art and has no collector value. It's fungible and you can cheat in making it, so it doesn't show the struggles and experiences of the artist.
#2: Being distinctive is important, if the artist cannot be recognized by the way they painted the painting is of low value. Artstation is generic and all blends to each other.
#3: Most of the shit on artstation is escapist garbage, and just like genre fiction is almost entirely trash for YA-brained ADHD brainrot patients, so is escapist painting. Doesn't help that half of the fans of it are manchild chuds.
#4: Millions are baby money for the rich art collectors. They buy something in the 1-5 million range like you buy candy.
#5: The truly expensive pieces (Tens of millions) are usually the first to do something, or by an artist that was first to do something. They're similar to an academic paper with a lot of citations - even if it's trash, it's valuable because it was the first.
#6: Art is a status symbol. They are also Veblen Goods, so they become more desirable the more expensive they are. This leads to a snowball effect on select artists.
#7: Art is useful for money laundering and indirect bribing: Tip someone you want to bribe off so they buy paintings from an upcoming artist, then spend $5 million promoting that artist, and then the bribe receiver sells the paintings that are now worth way more at a profit.

Mix of these factors, really. People are going to claim that it's all #7, but it's a relatively minor factor outside of people getting money out of China or bribing people/tax evasion in the US.