I'm very sceptical... Not as a person... But about digital art NFT's. Actually, at this point, I believe the crypto boys (and girls) are wandering off to areas of our universe where we humans will never ever live our lives. But because technology is able to create NFTs, the concept is turned into real technology and real services. And because some people will 'fall' for buying the story and subsequently pull their wallets to pay for ownership of some digital piece of art, the artists make a living while the speculators and traders may become millionair.
What's New? Isn't the none digital art world the same?
published by Binance (source)
What I do miss in this whole digital art NFT service approach, is something tangible. If I only get a token giving me proof of ownership of some digital piece of art, while I'm not getting anything more than what I can get for free by downloading the digital file as shown on the website, or take a screen shot of, what's the point to buy some ownership? I do wonder why something more tangible isn't offered in the services we see emerging around Ethereum, HIVE and (possibly) other blockchains.
Why not provide the token holder the ability to download some super high resolution version of whatever the token represents? Such approach would give the token holders something tangible, something truly unique. For instance this would offer the token holder the ability to make a gigantic large printout and decorate something with it, eg some wall, ceiling, or billboard. When nothing more than the same digital file like the one I can freely download/copy from the internet, I have nothing more than those who don't buy the token.
Ergo, no deal and business for NFT!
No market for digital art in form of NFT or in whatever form will become serious, when the token is not related to a higher resolution of the digital art piece itself. Knowing many users will not do anything with digital art then store this somewhere digitally and show it on the internet, laptop or smartphone, the resolution may not be enough and something even more tangible is needed. Maybe something like a none digital edition of that art piece (ie a printout, canvas or whatever).
All the stories about scarcity of digital tokens as the standard narrative of the crypto lovers, is BS, to state it mildly. The crypto boys and girls are trying to make everything in the physical world, digital and monetisable. But they forget that we humans are living in a physical world! Not everything can be made digital. Not everything can be monetisable.... Owww, maybe everything can be monetisable, but not everything shall be monetisable. Don't you think?
Ok ok, when virtual reality becomes super hi resolution included (natural) touch and smell senses; The virtual worlds becomes so good we can't experience the difference between real and virtual worlds anymore, we may find ourselves spending 24x7 in all these virtual worlds. When that happens, digital art NFT may have a place... Maybe! Who knows!? But as long as we live our lives in the physical world, I really have a hard time to understand why I would spend considerable money to own some digital proof owning some low resolution piece of digital art.
Why do we want to OWN a piece of digital art anyway?
Some may want to, the mass don't care. If the mass would start to care, we are moving more and more towards a society we don't want, a society of people wanting to show off! Or?
all images by edje unless stated otherwise
qsounds music & story library | A...K | L...Z |
hive curator for curie
wasn't the same with mp3 approximately +/-15 years ago? Why should I buy mp3s if I can download them for free. In last +/- 8 years the same topic came back again, but instead downloading there were options of streaming through youtube/soundcloud etc. Products are still non-tangible but represents a value and can be used as a source of incomes for both - sellers and buyers.
also you just touched a good point with VR/AR technology. When it will become popular, we can see a much bigger boom for NFTs than we see right now. Perhaps some of people are preparing themselves for this.
and on the dapps like superrare, makersplace etc you can only watch a small preview of the artworks. much bigger files are available to after finishing transaction.
The NFT play is different to the mp3 ripping and subsequently the rental of music through the streaming services. As a matter of fact, the younger generation is getting more and more accustomed to rent something instead of owning it. In similar ways, we may end up with multiple flat screens in our homes and in public places showing pieces of art which we get through an 'art rental' service, like a Spotify for Art work.
That said, Second Life showed already more than 10 years ago the possibility to monetise digital work. If I remember correctly, a shoe designer creating digital shoes which could be purchased in-game, became millionaire in doing so.
I just got verified as an artist with NFTshowroom and plan to use it in yet another way. Will post about it when I executed my idea :)
I remember that approximately 15 years ago, a friend from my class in my high school played in MU Online (something like World Of Warcraft or other MMORPG) so much that he failed a year, but in the same time he earned almost 7000$ by selling some swords, diamonds, shoes, shields and other kind of in-game stuff. This kind of money was unbelievable for people from Eastern European countries, so actually his parents were not really embarrassed or angry that he had to repeat the whole school year with younger kids.
and coming back to the topic, honestly I think that digital art through all those years was very undervalued and it is nice that with NFTs there is a chance to change it a bit.
Agree it nice for digital artists to be able to monetise through NFT. The question is: Will the mass adopt the idea of NFTing digital art? And when not the mass, at least those who like art and pay money for art in the physical world. Time will tell.
I just discovered NFTshowroom allows additional upload (eg higher resolution, or something else) which is made available to the owners of the token only. That is in itself something good, since this provides something extra to those who can simply download the digital pieces.
Am wondering if NFT is already used for trademarking brands, logos, names. I also wonder what happens when the NFT service used to sell tokens, is decommisioned, discontinued. I suppose the transactions are still on the blockchain, but in case of HIVE (and I suppose also for the Ethereum based NFT service), the media files (image, video etc) are not stored on the chain, and in case of HIVE (as far as I know), stored centrally somewhere. Sounds to me a lot needs to evolve still in this NFT space to make sure whatever one buys, will be there forever in an away the owner can always access what she/he purchased.
As mentioned before, soon I'll upload something to my own catalogue :)
The nutty columnist is a dinosaur who refuses to evolve.
Interesting characterisation. I would say, The Nutty Columnist doesn't move himself in the land between black and white statements. Though, he may be slightly into the grey areas of nuance. Lets go Dinosaur! :)
Even Scorsese had to “hope” that most viewers would watch The Irishman on a device at least as large as an iPad. Times and habits change, sometimes that doesn’t mean the changes make evolutionary sense either.
As Edje I totally agree with you. As the Nutty Columnist, I don't agree :)
It is Edje that just got verified by NFTshowroom, since it is Edje that likes to experiment and discover the value of whatever Edje is looking at. The Nutty Columnist doesn't like the in-between, he likes the outspoken side of things (and mixes facts, truths and fakes as he likes); He is very opinionated! :)