Most Expensive Photograph
The Pond-Moonlight by Edward Steichen has become the most expensive photograph ever, as it was just recentely sold for more than $2,900,000 during a Sotheby’s sale which began in New York on February 14, 2006. The expensive photograph was taken on Long Island in 1904. There are three known copies of the most expensive photograph in , and the picture is valued for its rarity because it is an early example of color autochrome photography. The other two copies of the photograph are held by the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York and the Museum of Modern Art.
Pond-Moonlight by Edward Steichen
Richard Prince’s Untitled (Cowboy) was previously the most expensive photograph in the world. The photograph can be seen as destroying the American cowboy myth. The cowboy is a stand-in for the artist himself, endlessly running off into the sunset. This most expensive photograph in the world creates a desire to experience rather than worry about material value of things. If you also want quality photographs of you or an event you are attending, check the Christophe Viseux Photography services.
Richard Prince
The most expensive photographs in the world in US dollar figures.
- Edward Steichen Pond-Moonlight (1904), $2,900,000+, 2006
- Richard Prince Untitled (Cowboy) (1989), $1,248,000, 2005
- Gustave Le Gray The Great Wave, Sete, (1857), $838,000, 1999
- Andreas Gursky Untitled 5 1997, $559,724, Feb. 6, 2002
- Gustave Le Gray Tree (1855), $513,150, 1999
- Diane Arbus Identical Twins (Cathleen and Colleen), Roselle, N.J. (1967), $478,400, Apr. 27, 2004
- Charles Sheeler Ford Works (1927), $447,350, 1999
- Alfred Stieglitz Georgia O’Keefe: Hands with Thimble, $398,500, May 31, 1998
- Gustave Le Gray Marine 1855, $368,420, 2000
- August Sander Handlanger, porteur de briques (Brick carrier) 1927, $328,940, 1999
The market for photography as an art form has come a long way in the last several decades. Pictures that were once sold for less than $100, or even casually thrown away, are now hot properties on the auction market… As always, the results are taken from Artnet’s signature Fine Art Auctions Database src
carola
says:what a waste of money….
Ruthie Carter
says:I firmly disagree with “carola”.I believe that photographs are a true work of art, ang that photographers are amazingly skilled artists who have the patience, perserverence and heart to do somthing that most of the world, (probably including carola) cannot bring their sorry minds to comprehend.
dalton
says:onybody can take a photograph but drawing or painting these things are much more difficult
ARTCRITIC
says:yea anyone can take a photograph but thats why they are worth such a significant amount less then paintings. There are two pictures worth over 1 mil. where there is a painting worth 140 mil.
Brian Hyman
says:“Andreas Gursky’s auction record was also broken when his photo May Day IV (2000) sold for \$632,000 (est. \$500,000-700,000)” (Ebony 2005, 1.).
XSkildpaddenX
says:I would rather have my own pictures… then i doesn’t only have a beatyful picture, but i also have the story of it, and thats more worth than 1 mill.
Ajith
says:I could buy every photograph in the world, but its not worth it!
Lukas
says:Wth these photographs r stupid i would never pay that much money for a picture id just go and get my own pictures
Kexy
says:What a waste of money, ppl who buy photographs are really silly, I can take a snapshot of the woods at night, add some photoshop effects and wala! it is a $2.9million photograph
Veronica
says:Photographs are works of art, requiring much skill to get right, just like it takes much skill to paint a masterpiece. Anyone can take a photo, but it doesn’t have to be good, just like anyone can paint a canvas, it takes years of practice, and skill to get right.
Photographs are moments in history, that can never be lived again.
Mike Allison
says:To Kexy, This may seem painfully obvious, but if photographic art is so simple, why haven’t you gone into “the woods at night”, taken your masterpiece and made 2.9 million $$$ or so?
It takes skill, patience and dedication to produce such images that provoke thought and emotions beyond that of everyday life. A camera, like a paintbrush, is merely the tool that the artist must use to create the end result.
vinnie
says:yeah, maybe because the “Pond-Moonlight” painting was taken on 1904 and it’s early example of color autochrome photography.it’s normal if “Pond-Moonlight” painting is expensive. but how about the “untitled (cowboy)” painting! it taken in 1989 and many photos are taken in that year!
Dani
says:Yes anyone can take a photograph, but it takes practice and knowledge and a good eye to take a amazing photograph. Its just like any other artform. Just cause it looks easy doesnt mean that it is.
I take insult to that as a photographer.
m m l gupta
says:PHOTGRAPHY IS ALERTNESS TO CAPTURE AN EVENT IN CAMERA AND PAINTING IS THE STATE OF MIND OF PAINTER TO DESCRIBE IT IN PAINTING.THE DIFF BETWEEN THE TWO IS HAPPENING AND DESCRIBING.
doodle
says:they are absolutley great photos but they are not worth that much i totally respect the time and hard work they put in to this but come on lower the price other than that i would tatally buy this work of art! 🙂
damilola toye
says:Perception is subjective..what is worthless to someone worth more to another person..That to me is the beauty of all things in nature.The Dual effect.
Doodlove
says:Art is NOT talent or skill. It is about the good luck to have some moron critic site your work as good. I have seen plenty of much better photographs and paintings in local galleries that will never be worth millions because they don’t have the right name attached to them. Wake up people.
sgt.pepper
says:what about the original beatles abbey road crossing