Sky's the limit for collectible digital coins! Digital-only art sells for $70M!
Imagine a world where people area buying collectible digital-only coins!
Imagine using machine learning to create coin images that look better than physical coins?
Christie’s auctions 'first digital-only artwork' for $70m
Digital collage by Beeple was offered with a non-fungible token to guarantee authenticity and paid for in cryptocurrency
Comments
-
A good recession usually tamps down this sort of lunacy.
9 -
@Zoins said:
Imagine a world where people area buying collectible digital-only coins!.
hehe i almost posted something about this in the current amazing coin background thread of stefs.
<--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -1 -
Imagine PCGS partnering with a company like NuTilt and instead of having a floating coin, it looked like you were tilting a slab?
0 -
You gotta have someplace to spend those bitcoins.
0 -
-
I don't see why that's any different than owning a painting. It's a unique work of art that you can display.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
5 -
@jmlanzaf said:
I don't see why that's any different than owning a painting. It's a unique work of art that you can display.I'm thinking about changing my retirement plans
0 -
LOL. You're going to become an artist?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
0 -
People are the strangest critters of all....Cheers, RickO
2 -
The reason I collect coins and medals is actually due to my interest in art (and history), not money or financial instruments. As a kid, I loved making origami in elementary school to sculpture in junior high and high school. I even inquired about majoring in architecture in college.
I still create now but I create via code. Similar to the collage above, you may have noticed many of my posted photos are now collages, assembled by code I wrote myself... so it's actually not too far off
0 -
Garbage art.
It would be completely fitting if the buyer paid by the garbage currency Bitcoin.
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)4 -
let's go for a NFT on the 33 DE!
Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions0 -
I will sell a group photo of my Mint Error or Hard Times Token collection for a mere $500K.
PM/DM me for purchase details
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!2 -
I don't get it, millions for a .jpg file? I also do not understand $2.5 million for a tweet, what are you getting?
0 -
@davewesen said:
I don't get it, millions for a .jpg file? I also do not understand $2.5 million for a tweet, what are you getting?The funny thing is that not everyone gets paying a lot for little metal discs either.
2 -
Is this just an extension of the idea of owning “ paper gold” or “ paper silver?”
0 -
There’s always a segment of the population that buys this kind of thing. They have so much money that it’s no different to them than buying some silverware at Walmart is to others. It’ll always be a thin market with likely little resale value like Peter Lik pictures.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
@silverpop said:
thanks i'd rather bid on a real coin then thisand yes some people have more money then common sense
Or they have enough money they don't need common sense?
1 -
@Zoins said:
@davewesen said:
I don't get it, millions for a .jpg file? I also do not understand $2.5 million for a tweet, what are you getting?Not everyone gets paying a lot for little metal discs either.
What I do not get is why I consistently read the sentiments of your OP where collectors would rather pay more for their collection. Wanting higher prices makes sense if someone is liquidating and quitting collecting altogether but it doesn't make any sense for those who are still in the accumulation phase.
There is no reason to believe this has any relevance to coin buying (at all) but if it actually occurs to a legitimately meaningful scale, the only thing it will succeed in doing is bringing in a relatively large number of affluent "investors" who will outbid practically everyone here out of the coins they currently collect, depending upon the coin or series. Those who own the coins now will make a one-time windfall but will otherwise be priced out.
If I get a chance to make a huge windfall, as much as I like what I collect, I'll cash out and pay cash for a home. I'd be more likely to quit altogether too, as there isn't anything else I want to buy anywhere near the same price or else I would buy it now.
0 -
@WCC said:
@Zoins said:
@davewesen said:
I don't get it, millions for a .jpg file? I also do not understand $2.5 million for a tweet, what are you getting?Not everyone gets paying a lot for little metal discs either.
What I do not get is why I consistently read the sentiments of your OP where collectors would rather pay more for their collection. Wanting higher prices makes sense if someone is liquidating and quitting collecting altogether but it doesn't make any sense for those who are still in the accumulation phase.
There is no reason to believe this has any relevance to coin buying (at all) but if it actually occurs to a legitimately meaningful scale, the only thing it will succeed in doing is bringing in a relatively large number of affluent "investors" who will outbid practically everyone here out of the coins they currently collect, depending upon the coin or series. Those who own the coins now will make a one-time windfall but will otherwise be priced out.
If I get a chance to make a huge windfall, as much as I like what I collect, I'll cash out and pay cash for a home. I'd be more likely to quit altogether too, as there isn't anything else I want to buy anywhere near the same price or else I would buy it now.
I think many collectors don't like to lose money selling coins and also sell / upgrade while building their collection. If it's going up, people are more comfortable because they feel like they are putting their money in a safe place.
Roger also relayed an interesting perspective where he researches coins and writes coin books now, but doesn't collect because he's been priced out of coins he likes.
1 -
@jmlanzaf said:
I don't see why that's any different than owning a painting. It's a unique work of art that you can display.Anyone can display it. The art is digital. The only difference is that one person owns it. This is quite different than a painting (a copy is not identical to the original and in this case there is no physical original) but it’s not different than owning video art (for which there maybe multiple copies but one can own the only “real one”) or concept art like Duchamp’s Fountain or a Dan Flavin light installation.
1 -
This reminds me of two "art" works.
The banana duct taped to a wall and the eyeglasses someone dropped on the floor at a museum and they quickly put velvet rope around the area to preserve it.
0 -
I was talking to my wife about this yesterday,
That is the custody of the blockchain of art to the original creation.
I have a great idea of how to market my photographs this way but have no idea how to get it done.
In my case, I could sell a high-end digital copy of one of my photographs and the blockchain would include the original 4x5 transparency which is a piece of 4x5 inch sheet film.
Hmmmm.....
9 -
I've bought a few NFTs this month. It is an interesting concept, and a legitimate usage of blockchain technology. No idea if the value will quadruple or go to $0, so I made sure I like the real-world artist and the pieces I bought. I first heard about Bitcoin when it was about $1 (and promptly forgot about it until it blew up), so you never know. It's pure speculation on my part and I've written it off as so.
That said, with high-powered photography in numismatics is there some legitimate usage of this technology in our hobby? Perhaps there are applications for authenticity [for ex., having the validated TrueView "minted" by PCGS to correspond with the physical coin]. Bringing coin collecting into a very hot space could open the hobby up to a new cohort of people that would have never considered it.
Yes, it all seems a bit far-fetched especially if you are just hearing about digital artwork for the first time in this post, but there might actually be something here.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
4 -
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
I've bought a few NFTs this month. It is an interesting concept, and a legitimate usage of blockchain technology. No idea if the value will quadruple or go to $0, so I made sure I like the real-world artist and the pieces I bought. I first heard about Bitcoin when it was about $1, so you never know. It's pure speculation on my part and I've written it off as so.That said, with high-powered photography in numismatics is there some legitimate usage of this technology in our hobby? Perhaps there are applications for authenticity [for ex., having the validated TrueView "minted" by PCGS to correspond with the physical coin]. Bringing coin collecting into a very hot space could open the hobby up to a new cohort of people that would have never considered it.
Yes, it all seems a bit far-fetched especially if you are just hearing about digital artwork for the first time in this post, but there might actually be something here.
Great info. I'm trying to get into blockchain now and it's nice to see NFTs being used for art. Want to give it a try.
1 -
@Zoins said:
I think many collectors don't like to lose money selling coins and also sell / upgrade while building their collection. If it's going up, people are more comfortable because they feel like they are putting their money in a safe place.
This is true but it's also indicative that they don't actually like what they collect as commonly claimed.
Back to this topic, with art but not with coins, I can see two advantages, as long as the blockchain is properly secured:
One, less susceptible to theft which presumably should result in lower insurance costs.
Two, less susceptible to damage.
I still see no relevance to coins whatsoever. Almost no coin is unique in the same context. Where actually scarce, it's more equivalent to a limited edition print. Per the other thread, even the 1933 DE isn't unique enough (ignoring the coins which cannot be legally owned) because there are millions of other dated Saints and non-collectors have no reason to care about date rarity other than financial.
1 -
So if they buy these NFT with bitcoin or ether, then sell them for dollars, sounds like a new way to launder money, if needed.
0 -
@david3142 said:
@jmlanzaf said:
I don't see why that's any different than owning a painting. It's a unique work of art that you can display.Anyone can display it. The art is digital. The only difference is that one person owns it. This is quite different than a painting (a copy is not identical to the original and in this case there is no physical original) but it’s not different than owning video art (for which there maybe multiple copies but one can own the only “real one”) or concept art like Duchamp’s Fountain or a Dan Flavin light installation.
This is not true, is it? The whole nature of the "non-fungible token" is that you can NOT copy the digital art.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
1 -
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
I was talking to my wife about this yesterday,That is the custody of the blockchain of art to the original creation.
I have a great idea of how to market my photographic this way but have no idea how to get it done.
In my case, I could sell a high-end digital copy of one of my photographs and the blockchain would include the original 4x5 transparency which is a piece of 4x5 inch sheet film.
Hmmmm.....
Kodak was working on this, were they not?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
0 -
@jmlanzaf said:
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
I was talking to my wife about this yesterday,That is the custody of the blockchain of art to the original creation.
I have a great idea of how to market my photographic this way but have no idea how to get it done.
In my case, I could sell a high-end digital copy of one of my photographs and the blockchain would include the original 4x5 transparency which is a piece of 4x5 inch sheet film.
Hmmmm.....
Kodak was working on this, were they not?
I have no idea.
0 -
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
@jmlanzaf said:
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
I was talking to my wife about this yesterday,That is the custody of the blockchain of art to the original creation.
I have a great idea of how to market my photographic this way but have no idea how to get it done.
In my case, I could sell a high-end digital copy of one of my photographs and the blockchain would include the original 4x5 transparency which is a piece of 4x5 inch sheet film.
Hmmmm.....
Kodak was working on this, were they not?
I have no idea.
I lost track of the story. A couple years ago they were talking about developing an ethereum token to authenticate digital images. I don't know what happened. It caused a brief surge in ethereum at the time...or was it Litecoin?
edited to add:
This was the original story I saw.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/kodak-boards-the-blockchain-bandwagon-2018-01-09All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
2 -
jm, thank you for the link.
I remember Kodak Stock popping but did not know what it was all about.
0 -
@jmlanzaf said:
@david3142 said:
@jmlanzaf said:
I don't see why that's any different than owning a painting. It's a unique work of art that you can display.Anyone can display it. The art is digital. The only difference is that one person owns it. This is quite different than a painting (a copy is not identical to the original and in this case there is no physical original) but it’s not different than owning video art (for which there maybe multiple copies but one can own the only “real one”) or concept art like Duchamp’s Fountain or a Dan Flavin light installation.
This is not true, is it? The whole nature of the "non-fungible token" is that you can NOT copy the digital art.
It’s just a digital image. You’ve seen it online, right? That is as valid a representation as the owner can get. Anyone can view it (but can’t print or distribute it) but one person owns the address. I do not know if the creator maintains the copyright or if that transferred with the NFT.
0 -
Geez. Insanity runneth amok these days.
1 -
I don't get it. I see a collage, the likes of which has been done before, where several orders of magnitude in the price paid were a result of a well-managed promotion. A non-connected artist that does something like this would get $70 for it as a stock photo, maybe $85 if they adopted a single-word art name like "Beeple."
John
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution0 -
It probably has some notoriety for being the first.
1 -
Let me know when the digital tulip bulb market starts to warm up.
0 -
@messydesk said:
I don't get it. I see a collage, the likes of which has been done before, where several orders of magnitude in the price paid were a result of a well-managed promotion. A non-connected artist that does something like this would get $70 for it as a stock photo, maybe $85 if they adopted a single-word art name like "Beeple."The artist Beeple said his $69 million artwork took 13 years to complete
0 -
This is definitely a generational thing. Ask a 15 year old that plays video games if they'd like $10 or a new shirt for their online character. They'll take the shirt. The digital ownership of stuff is real.
4 -
@nags said:
This is definitely a generational thing. Ask a 15 year old that plays video games if they'd like $10 or a new shirt for their online character. They'll take the shirt. The digital ownership of stuff is real.I interview high school students that apply to my Alma Mater. Some students create Red Cross fund raising drives, some attend model UN, but one of the most creative was one who created an online marketplace for digital goods from online games. Apparently, he made a good amount of money but his parents didn't understand it and made him shut it down.
0 -
In an interview I just watched, someone said in the future, NFT's can show ownership of a house, a car, and my takeaway is perhaps a high-end unique coin
1 -
@david3142 said:
@jmlanzaf said:
@david3142 said:
@jmlanzaf said:
I don't see why that's any different than owning a painting. It's a unique work of art that you can display.Anyone can display it. The art is digital. The only difference is that one person owns it. This is quite different than a painting (a copy is not identical to the original and in this case there is no physical original) but it’s not different than owning video art (for which there maybe multiple copies but one can own the only “real one”) or concept art like Duchamp’s Fountain or a Dan Flavin light installation.
This is not true, is it? The whole nature of the "non-fungible token" is that you can NOT copy the digital art.
It’s just a digital image. You’ve seen it online, right? That is as valid a representation as the owner can get. Anyone can view it (but can’t print or distribute it) but one person owns the address. I do not know if the creator maintains the copyright or if that transferred with the NFT.
Have I seen it or just a picture of it?
I've also seen the Mona Lisa online. I've seen the Mona Lisa on canvas and on velvet.
Digital art is an actual thing, long before this.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
0 -
@MasonG said:
Let me know when the digital tulip bulb market starts to warm up.People pay $5 million for 1913 Liberty nickels that are some form of shenanigans. People paid $5 million+ for an old gold medal made by a guy named Brasher.
I'm not sure any of it is exactly "logical".
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
3 -
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
In an interview I just watched, someone said in the future, NFT's can show ownership of a house, a car, and my takeaway is perhaps a high-end unique coinIf the US MInt or even PCGS or NGC sold limited edition NFT I bet they would be successful. It really isn't significantly different than the different labels on a basically generic slabbed coin. Create a registry for the coin related NFT and let her rip.
0 -
Now they are talking about fractional interests in NFT's just like Bitcoin.
LOL. This is gunna move fast. Bust, then slow bounce
0 -
Complete nonsense.
All glory is fleeting.2 -
-
More silliness
Dave
Always looking for original, better date VF20-VF35 Barber quarters and halves, and a quality beer.0 -
@291fifth said:
Complete nonsense.The only thing supporting the value of any collectible being over its intrinsic value is the supply/demand. I’m not sure how that dynamic is any different in a coin, stamp, or an electronic asset.
It’s also not appealing to me, but it clearly is very appealing to a large group of people.
2
Leave a Comment
Categories
- All Categories
- 520K Coins and Currency - PCGS
- 328.5K U.S. Coin Forum
- 14.8K PCGS Set Registry Forum
- 5.2K Q & A Forum
- 41.4K World & Ancient Coins Forum
- 3K U.S. & World Currency Forum
- 96.4K Buy, Sell, & Trade - U.S. Coins
- 7.3K Buy, Sell & Trade - World & Ancient Coins
- 1.5K Buy, Sell & Trade - Currency
- 60 Random
- 246.2K Trading Cards, Autographs and Memorabilia - PSA
- 90.3K Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
- 1.7K Autographs Forum
- 16.4K PSA Set Registry Forum
- 22K Sports Talk
- 115K Buy, Sell & Trade - Cards & Memorabilia
- 663 Buy, Sell & Trade - Autographs
- 2.2K Stamps
- 1.5K Stamps Forum
- 670 Buy, Sell & Trade - Stamps
- 83 Coin Shows
- 83 General Coin Show Information and Discussion
- 11.9K Misc
- 11.9K Testing Forum