Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Whitehead View Post
The Mona Lisa was a famous piece before it was reproduced. And it is kinda old and stuff...

Just so you know.
Thank you - i had no idea. I was sure that it was whipped up in the past decade or so. Perhaps by Thomas Kinkade? Or was it Christian Lassen?

You made no delineation in your original statement between "old" art, "new" art, "kinda famous" art, or anything.

You said:
I just feel that once there is a print run, the work is no longer an original
Sue me for taking you for exactly what you said.

If you don't think that print distribution and subsequent popularization increases the demand and therefore the value of the original work, by all means feel free to offer a good reason why not, or any kind of supporting evidence.

I'd also like to know where you got the idea that it's "not that much more expensive" to produce copious quantities of valuable originals than it is to have an equivalent number of quality lithographs run, numbered and signed for a select group of pieces? You may have an interest in art and buying art or whatever, so you'd be speaking as the consumer? I am approaching this conversation from the production POV, for what it's worth.

And so far as I can tell, the only one with his "knickers in a twist" so far here would be you? Or am I also mistaken? Since we are both adults endowed with the capacity for civilized discussion (or so I was lead to believe); please spare me the patronizing cliches.