ART MARKET APPRAISAL (Essay Sample)

MAAB05 ART MARKET APPRAISAL ASSIGNMENT Students Name Institutional Affiliation * Evaluate its relative position in its own art market sector as well as in the art market in general; critically analyse the way it has been presented and marketed by the auction house. Introduction The most costly antique marble sold at auction was an impressive sculpture of the goddess of love. According to the auction house, it established a record for the highest price ever paid for an antique marble sculpture. It is one of the largest Roman sculptures in private hands, a marble statue of the Capitoline Aphrodite known as The Hamilton Aphrodite, to be sold for £18,582,000. This means that the fine piece of art was a masterpiece and, in a room filled with millionaires, it would be sold to the highest bidder. The catalogue entry of the artwork is very essential in showing the bidders why the product is worth its high value. For this artwork, the catalogue has been used to first indicate its provenance which is very important in illustrating the authenticity and value of the article. Furthermore, the catalogue has given detailed information in regards to the its description and illustration of the artwork and also highlighting its uniqueness thus showing why it has a high value. The catalogue has been designed in order to be more objective in order to try and influence opinions of as many bidders as possible and also giving it authenticity by highlighting other royalty collections that were in a royalty collection along with the article. It thus important to highlight the objectivity of the catalogue that is very essential in influencing and inviting as many bidders as possible and thus the high value of the artwork. In addition, the documentation of the artwork can also be used to justify the high value placed on it. It can be noted that in its documentation, the artwork has also been authenticated. The documentation highlights a letter by Gavin Hamilton, a painter and an art dealer who was the first person to purchase it in the late eighteenth century, to Lord Shelburne who was among. In the letter, Hamilton has described the original artwork which he bought and the descriptions match the current artwork in almost all aspects such as size thus verifying the originality. This is very essential in proving and showing why the artwork is worth the value that has been placed on. The market position of the artwork is very strong and firm as its provenance adds more value to it. This is because knowing the originality of the artwork and being actually able to trace it up to the beginning gives the artwork more authenticity. Authenticity thus boosts the value and can thus be used to justify the high value placed on the artwork. The provenance of the artwork has highlighted a number of qualities and characteristics that it has that may be used to justify the value of the artwork. It has clearly highlighted the provenance of the artwork such as its original ownership and its subsequent ownership up to date. This has authenticated the artwork and has shown a very valuable quality of the artwork which is its durability. It can be noted that the artwork was acquired in the eighteenth century and it is still very long lasting as per the auction date. This shows that the artwork has been in existence for over two centuries therefore it is more reliable and durable hence worth the value it has been placed on for auction.[Mayukh Dass, "Modeling on-line art auction dynamics using functional data analysis,"181.] Furthermore, the provenance of the artwork can also be traced to its ownership in the past and thus it is important to highlight it. The artwork has been associated with being royalty as it once belonged to the duke of Hamilton who was a member of a royal family. Being associated with Royalty has played a major role in placing high value on the artwork. The artwork was also a collection of Thomas Hope who is also a writer and a designer and is well experienced thus his reputation precedes him. His taste was well known as people already knew he was a presumptive taste maker. This thus places much confidence in the audience interested as the artworks is among the collection of one of the most trusted people in art and design. It thus guarantees authenticity as its quality can be assured based on the record of the collector. In addition, the great reputation of the collector and also its quality facilitates high value being placed on the artwork. The artwork has also an estimated value of approximately two million to three million British Pounds sterling. This shows how high the art is valued and how strong it is in the market. In addition, the eventual hammer price of the item is eighteen million five hundred and eighty-two thousand British Pounds. The hammer price is the winning bid for a lot at any auction. The artwork has a potential investment value because of its uniqueness and due to the fact that it still has the restorations of the eighteenth century. It can thus be distinguished from other artefacts and its uniqueness may help raise its value hence becoming a potential future investment. Another artwork in which comparison can be made is the Hellenistic marble Torso of Aphrodite, circa 1st century B.C., or earlier. The artwork was auctioned in Sotheby’s auction house on 12th December 2014 and also had a very high price. Its estimated price was ranging from eight hundred thousand to one million two hundred thousand dollars. The artwork was later bided at Sotheby’s for approximately one million eight hundred thousand. The two artworks can be compared in terms of their similarities and differences. The first similarity that can be drawn from the two is the rich history that they both have. The artworks are dated back to the eighteenth century and their authenticity can be verified as the both catalogues have highlighted the previous ownership showing provenance. This has indeed been a key factor in influencing the biding of the artworks that resulted to having higher sale value. The other similarity that can be noted from the artworks is that both are marbles of Aphrodite which means a Greek goddess. Furthermore, both the artworks have a potential higher investment value as they may attract higher bids in the future as compared to the price at which they were finally bided at initially. This is due to the high qualities that both artworks possess. While noting the similarities in the artworks, they can also be compared in their differences. The first difference that can be highlighted from the two is that one marble was during the Roman dates while the other appears to be of a Hellenistic date. The artworks also have different biding prices and this can also be highlighted as a difference.[Stone, "The New York Sleeping Eros: A Hellenistic Statue and Its Ancient Restoration," 56.] [] In addition, the artwork can also be further compared to another one that may belong in the same class. Another example includes the Greek Marble Aphrodite Hellenistic period, Circa 2ND – 1ST Century B.C. The marble is of Greek origin and also has a high value that has been placed on it with its estimated auction price range being its estimated value being on a range of sixty thousand to ninety thousand dollars. Its eventual price that was bided is one hundred thousand dollars. It was auctioned and sold at christie’s auction house. The artwork can thus be compared to the Roman marble in various aspects while highlighting their similarities and differences. The similarities may vary in various aspects such as the eventually bided price was higher than the earlier estimated price. This is because of the objectivity of the catalogue entry of the two artworks. The catalogue managed to influence the bidders into seeing the value of the artworks and this led to the bidding reaching more than the estimated price as they attracted great competition. In addition, the artefacts also have a possible very high investment value and thus in the future the bided price will be vary high as compared to the price at which it was bought. This then gives the artworks strong market position both in the art sector and the general sector. The differences in the two artworks can also be seen in their estimated prices with the Roman marble being of a higher estimated and also biding price as compared to the Greek marble. In conclusion, there are various factors that affect and influence the market value for which the final biding price can range. The estimated price is very influential in setting precedence for the bidding price thus giving the artwork a strong starting price. The catalogues, provenance and documentation of the artwork is also very essential in influencing the market position of the artwork as it may give some objectivity that can be able to help in influencing the market towards bidding higher. It is thus important to highlight appealing information that may try to lure the bidders into maximizing the estimated price and thus an artwork can therefore gain a higher biding value.[Ellen M. "Christie's." Financial Executive 27, no. 8 (2011): 16-18.] b) Evaluate the artist’s, style/movement’s or object type’s market performance since 2007 in terms of its relative position within its own art market sector as well as in the general art market. Critically assess the factors which you consider have affected the market value over this fifteen-year period and assess the investment value and its future potential. This piece of art was motivated by the most renowned Greek goddess sculpture, Aphrodite of Knidos. It was carved from exquisite marble by the artist Praxiteles in the 4th century B.C. and was widely regarded as the earliest devotional figure of a female deity in her undress. When it was put in a holy precinct on the island of Knidos, it caused an immediate sensation, and centuries later, it inspired Roman painters to recre...