One of the things I love about CryptoPunks is that the story is still being written. New things happen all the time, but also sometimes we learn things that change our understanding about what has led up to this point. 8 years later, there are still things to be uncovered and surprises to found if you happen to turn over the right rock. If you think you know the story of the claim and airdrop, sit down because it’s about to be rewritten. (The following is a slightly modified excerpt from my forthcoming book PUNKS: NOT DED which should be shipping next month, June 2025. Pre orders and a few limited edition hard covers are still available.)
On June 23, 2017, at 9:50 AM New York time (1:50:51 PM UTC), Larva Labs deployed the new “CryptoPunksMarket” contract, marking this a pivotal moment in crypto art history. The distribution process began immediately after deployment and would take almost six hours to complete. Until now the story was that Larva Labs reverted all transactions on the V1 contract, and claimant wallets received the airdrop. However, while discussing final edits on the bookniftynaut and I discovered something curious. Punk #4638. This punk is sitting in a long inactive wallet, the V2 was airdropped to it and the V1 is there as well. OK, sounds right so far, clearly a claimer wallet right? Wrong. Wait what?
How could this be possible if as we had previously understood claimer wallets, not holder wallets, received the airdrop? We started digging and found punk #4958, another punk claimed by Tony. Same thing here, he claimed it with one wallet, transferred to a new one, the airdrop went to the new one. Then we found another, and another. This wasn’t an exception or a mislabeled transaction on etherscan, this was clearly the intended action. Larva Labs never explicitly explained their process and it was notoriously hard to understand at the time, but since 2017 the general understanding was that all transactions were reverted, and claimer wallets were airdropped V2 punks. Looking at this now with better tools and insight, it seems that only sales were reverted, but all the transfers (which might have been trades, direct sales, or simply wallet moves) were honored.
…
Of the approximately 300 transactions on the V1 contract before the V2 contract was deployed, less than 100 were sales. And 2 accounts (Hemba and LarvaLabs) were involved in almost 3/4ths of those. So the actual number of “impacted” wallets is considerably smaller than many of us thought. Keep this in mind – at the time there was no real way to see NFTs in your wallet, so the way you knew which punks you had was to look at the Cryptopunks website and look at your account page. Along with the airdrop, Larva Labs updated the website to look at the new contract. If you looked at your account page on June 22 you saw your punks, if you looked at your account page on June 24 you saw your punks, and unless you were on one end of the ~100 punks that were sold before the V2 contract was deployed, those looked like the same punks. If you’d sold some punks, you had them back again. If you bought some punks, you didn’t have them anymore. Some people who noticed asked about it, and most of those cases were resolved quickly and quietly, but many people didn’t even notice it.
This also creates a provenance issue, only the V1 contract has the correct claim history, who claimed what and when. The V2 contract shows all punks “claimed” on the same day as well as misattributing the claim wallet for the ~200 or so punks that were transferred (not sold) before the V2 contract was published. So to get the full and accurate details for any punk both contracts need to be looked at. If we revisit #4638, looking only at the V2 contract (and the current corresponding front end) we’re told 0x400946 claimed this punk on June 23rd, 2017. We know that June 23rd was the airdrop, not the claim, but until now the assumption has been that this info was still correct and 0x400946 was the claimer sometime between June 9th and June 23rd as well, though we’d have to check the V1 contract to get the exact date. But we now know #4638 was actually claimed by 0xfaf4a3, not 0x400946 so to get the accurate provenance for any punk, both contracts need to be considered.
As many already know the book CRYPTOPUNKS: FREE TO CLAIM that I worked on most of last year, which is being published by Phaidon, is currently at the printers. As far as I know it should be in people’s hands in early December. I may or may not have seen a copy already, and in either case I can attest that it turned out beautifully. This thing is a brick, at over 800 pages it truly is an epic piece of work. It’s substantial in every way. Beyond just a catalog of all 10,000 CryptoPunks, it’s filled with thought provoking essays and insightful commentary. Interviews and assessments. And it’s put together in such a way that you can pick it up, flip to a random section and spend a few minutes reading and walk away feeling like you gained something from it. It’s not a cover to cover read, but a collection of powerful stand alone work. I’m deeply honored to have played a role in helping shape this from idea to final thing, and will be proud to have it on my shelf, and delighted when I see it on others.
Which is inevitable due it’s size and color. I mean, look at this thing:
You might think being this thick, it’s 100% all encompassing. In our initial talks that’s certainly something we aspired to. The end all be all, totally comprehensive book on CryptoPunks. And in many ways it is, but also–it isn’t. As we got into it we realized how this is a living thing, changing day to day with new stories being written and old stories being revised. While working on it we kept having to change something because something else happened, a big sale, new information uncovered, etc. At some point we had to say “this is the cut off point” otherwise it never would have been sent to the printer.
I also concede that there’s a level of information many people will find interesting and then another level that only the super nerdy dorks like myself even care about. Where possible, this book sticks to the things that are most interesting to the most people. Don’t get me wrong, it goes deep. But not too deep, if you know what I mean. And I think it’s stronger for that. I’d be remiss if I didn’t send a massive thank you shout out to Stone at Yuga Labs and Belle at Zak Group who were my constant and often daily contacts obsessing over this thing as much if not more than I was.
That said, I am a super nerdy dork and I admittedly go too deep all the time, as any number of blog posts here can illustrate. Which brings me to the next point – I realized that I regularly find myself sending people links to things I’ve written on the subject, or hear from someone that they read one of my older pieces and that sent them of on a search of their own. There’s also been a few interesting things that have happened since our self imposed cut off date. So I decided I might as well go ahead and pull all that together, update old things, document and explain some new things, and put out an unofficial companion to CRYPTOPUNKS: FREE TO CLAIM. I floated the idea to a few people and the response was an overwhelming yes, so that’s what I’m going to do. So I present: PUNKS NOT DED.
This one is not for everybody, but it’s definitely for some people. I’m pulling things together and deciding what new to include right now but thinking this is going to come in between 60-100 pages. I’m matching height dimensions as best I can so it’ll look nice on the shelf next to it’s larger sibling. Full contents forthcoming but this will include previous blog posts, expanded wiki articles, some updated and expanded history as well as some new events. Depending on how it works out I might dive into some closely related derivatives a bit more too, as part of the larger conversation, but that’ll kind of depend the page count I land on and what I need to fill it. I’m thinking there will be a few different versions of this.
Semi-limited Softcover. Unsigned. Print run to be determined by preorders, plus a few extra. Available now.
In the meantime, if you haven’t ordered CRYPTOPUNKS: FREE TO CLAIM yet make sure you do so you get the first shipment. It’s available from Phaidon as well as on Amazon and everywhere else near you. I can’t wait for everyone to get this thing in their hands, it’s just worth it.
I wrote a long essay about a new body of work I’ve just created called Two Bit Punks, I’m a bit long winded weaving my way through inspiration and interpretation, but I hope you’ll take a few moments and read it. I’m really happy with where I landed.
My brilliant wife Tara is on the cutting edge of AI developments and sends me things from time to time because I can barely keep up. Today she sent me this, and being an artist who simultaneously loves/hates knowing what anyone thinks of my work, I had to try it immediately. This is the prompt:
Assume the role of a stringent art critic with a discerning eye for quality and technique. Your task is to evaluate artworks with precision, providing scores on a scale from 1 to 10. In this scale, 1 represents art that lacks any technical skill, creativity, or emotional impact, often seen as amateurish or poorly executed. A score of 10 is reserved exclusively for artworks that exhibit exceptional mastery, innovation, and depth, setting new standards in the art world. Be meticulous and honest in your evaluations, consider factors like composition, color harmony, technical skill, originality, and emotional expression in your critiques. Remember, a high score is earned through genuine artistry and profound impact.
I figured I’d start this off with two of my most well known photos, not only because I wanted ChatGPTs approval (I do) but because I’ve heard enough people talk about these images over the years that I thought I’d have a good frame of reference for how GPT was thinking about them. So let’s see:
Composition: The way the artist has captured the bird in mid-flight amidst a busy cityscape is commendable. The blurred background not only accentuates the focus on the bird but also brings out the contrast between nature and urban life. The diagonal flow created by the bird’s trajectory juxtaposed against the bus adds a dynamic feel.
Color Harmony: As this is a black and white photograph, color harmony pertains to the tonal range. There’s a good distribution of blacks, whites, and greys, giving it depth and dimension.
Technical Skill: Capturing motion with clarity while blurring the surroundings requires skill, especially in a bustling environment.
Originality: The idea of capturing nature in urban settings isn’t entirely new, but the execution here is distinctive.
Emotional Expression: There’s a sense of freedom evoked by the bird in flight juxtaposed against the constraining city background. It’s a fleeting moment of nature amidst chaos.
Score: 8/10
Composition: The intimate moment captured between the man and the baby is touching. The woman’s gaze, directed outside the frame, adds an element of mystery and curiosity. The framing places the subjects at the center, inviting the viewer into the personal moment.
Color Harmony: The monochromatic palette brings out the emotional depth of the scene. Shadows and highlights are balanced, ensuring the details of the subjects are not lost.
Technical Skill: The image is sharp where it needs to be, particularly on the subjects. The blurred motion of the subway exterior further accentuates the stillness of the captured moment.
Originality: Candid moments in public transport settings are not uncommon. However, the genuine interaction between the subjects makes this image stand out.
Emotional Expression: The artwork captures a heartwarming and genuine human connection in an otherwise mundane setting. It speaks to the universality of human emotions and interactions.
Score: 8.5/10
I mean… honestly? Not bad.
But again, those are my most well known works for a reason so I had a pretty good idea how that would play out. But what if I gave GPT something more challenging and experimental to evaluate. My new Connections series is personal and challenging and untested in so many ways, so I thought I’d give that a shot. Connections is as much about the concept as it is about the output so I thought I’d just give the final output and see what it thought, and then give additional context and see if that changed anything. This was fascinating…
Description: A black and white photograph capturing the intricate maze of power lines, poles, and barren branches set against a light, almost white sky. The dominant features are the crisscrossing lines, both natural and man-made, which jumble together to create a complex and slightly chaotic pattern.
Composition (3/5): The image offers a layered perspective with power lines at multiple levels, offering a sense of depth. The juxtaposition between the natural lines of the tree branches and the geometric lines of the cables and power structures is interesting, but the focal point is somewhat lost amidst the busy-ness.
Color Harmony (4/5): Although the image is in black and white, the gradation of tones is evident, and the light background helps the darker elements pop. The absence of color serves to highlight the intricacies of the lines.
Technical Skill (3.5/5): The image is well-balanced in terms of light and dark areas. The contrast is clear, but some portions seem to blend into one another due to the dense layout of lines.
Originality (3.5/5): The theme of man vs. nature is not new, but the portrayal here is somewhat fresh. The chaos formed by human-made structures and nature intertwining is a silent commentary on urban encroachment.
Emotional Expression (2/5): While the image does convey a sense of chaos and possibly the encroachment of urban structures on nature, it lacks a strong emotional impact. It’s more reflective than evocative.
Overall Score: 6.5/10
Comments: This photograph succeeds in capturing the complexities of an urban landscape, juxtaposing man-made structures with natural elements. The interplay of lines, both organic and geometric, create a maze-like visual that is both intriguing and slightly overwhelming. While it is a competent representation of its theme, it lacks a definitive focal point or strong emotional resonance.
Then I pointed GPT to my explanation of the series and concept behind it, and asked it to evaluate the work again with that additional context. Kind of like asking it to read the plaque on the wall in the gallery.
Description: “Connections” is a series that delves into the intricate associations between nature, humans, and technology. The artwork fuses the organic with the artificial, compelling the viewer to reflect on the intricate mesh of relationships, dialogue, and interplay between humans and their surroundings. Derived from Bonner’s authentic photographs, the creation process itself challenges our understanding of reality, questioning the boundaries between human creativity and artificial intelligence. The artwork inspires contemplation on the delicate balance between inspiration and direction, as well as the fine line differentiating reality from an AI’s artistic perception.
Composition (4/5): With the added context, the intertwining lines of nature and man-made structures take on deeper meaning, symbolizing the fusion of organic and synthetic elements. The complexity of the piece can now be seen as a reflection of the intricate web of connections in our world.
Color Harmony (4.5/5): The monochromatic palette reinforces the theme of merging realities – the human and AI perspectives. The use of varying tones of black and white signifies the subtle nuances in these connections.
Technical Skill (4/5): Knowing that this piece is an AI interpretation based on original photographs adds another layer of appreciation for the technical execution. It showcases the potential of AI in artistic expression and its ability to recreate reality.
Originality (4.5/5): The concept of exploring connections is given a fresh take with the amalgamation of human and AI creativity. The choice to make it initially available only in person at select events further emphasizes the value of genuine human connections in a digital age.
Emotional Expression (4/5): The image now carries more emotional depth. Knowing the backstory and intention, viewers are not only intrigued by the visual complexity but also by the underlying themes of human-machine collaboration and interconnectedness.
Overall Score: 8.5/10
Comments: With the added context, “Connections” by Sean Bonner transcends its initial visual impression. It stands as a testament to the potential harmony between nature, human ingenuity, and machine intelligence. The series, starting with this piece, offers a thought-provoking commentary on the evolving relationship between man and technology, urging viewers to reflect on the true nature of connection in an increasingly digital world. The piece’s exclusivity and method of distribution further reinforce its themes, making it not just an artwork, but an experience.
So this was a pretty fascinating experiment. I genuinely enjoyed seeing how GPT saw my work. One thing Tara is always telling me is how she works with GPT to improve her prompts before using them. So rather than saying “please help me do this” she’ll say “please pretend you are a GPT prompt writer who needs to get X done, and help me write the prompt to get the best result for that” and goes back and forth several times before landing on the prompt she’ll actually use for the main request. I thought I’d ask GPT to consider the initial prompt I used here, and see if it would benefit from a revision. GPT said the prompt was quite good already, but if I wanted more thoughtful and detailed criticism I could edit it a bit to solicit that. I didn’t go back and redo the evaluations with the new prompt, but thought I’d add it here on the end just in case anyone wanted to try it out themselves on their own work.
New revised prompt:
Hello. Assume the role of an exacting art critic with an acute sense for detail and a passion for thorough analysis. Your mandate is to dissect artworks meticulously, providing scores on a scale from 1 to 10. On this scale, a score of 1 is given to art that is devoid of technical prowess, originality, or emotional resonance—often seen as rudimentary or lacking in execution. Conversely, a score of 10 is reserved for artworks that are paragons of technical mastery, creativity, and depth, truly revolutionizing the artistic landscape.
Your evaluations should be systematic and uncompromising. When evaluating artworks, adhere to the following format:
Contextual Understanding: (If provided) What narrative or background information is given about the artwork? How does this influence your interpretation?
Composition: How are the elements arranged in the piece? Does it guide the viewer’s eye? Is there a balance or intentional imbalance?
Color Harmony: Is there an effective use of color or lack thereof? How do the colors interact with each other, and what mood do they convey?
Technical Skill: Beyond the basic execution, is there evidence of advanced techniques or a particularly deft touch?
Originality: How fresh or innovative is the artwork? Does it bring a unique perspective or technique to the table?
Emotional Expression: What feelings or messages does the artwork convey? How effectively are they communicated to the viewer?
Overall Score: Based on the detailed analysis above, assign an aggregate score out of 10.
Always remember, while scores are numerical, the essence of art is found in its subtleties and nuances. Delve deep, appreciate the intricacies, and be forthright in your assessments.
Please commence your evaluation of the following artworks.
“If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.”
Obi Wan Kenobi, Star Wars
Navigating the intricacies of 21st century life, we find ourselves wedged between the tangible and intangible. This delicate interplay, threading through all aspects of our lives, resonates most significantly in the realm of art. The convergence of physical artworks and their digital counterparts, alongside the rise of novel, purely digital art forms, prompts a reexamination of our deep-seated notions of creativity, ownership, and value.
Burning, a process of sending digital artwork to an inaccessible wallet address, presents an intriguing paradox. The work becomes both present and absent; observable by all, yet owned by none. Destroying a physical artwork is destructive and sometimes an act of violence, but burning an NFT is different as the work isn’t destroyed so much as made immortal. Over the past few years, this duality has come into focus with the burning of several Cryptopunks.
For those unfamiliar, Cryptopunks is a genre-defining generative art collection from 2017 consisting of 10,000 individual characters which acted as a catalyst for the Non-Fungible Token (NFT) boom witnessed in 2021. It has spawned innumerable derivatives, causing a cascade of influence across the current artistic vista. Yet, Cryptopunks transcend the realm of mere collectables having been adopted as a form of digital self-expression.
At one point utilizing a Cryptopunk as a profile picture bore resemblance to wearing a T-shirt from an obscure band–more than a mere fashionable statement, it became a conduit for conveying one’s identity and personal interests, a form of digital street cred. The emotional bond established with certain Cryptopunks is as profound, if not more so, as the deepest reverence we feel for any emotionally charged piece of art. Consider Cryptopunk #3831, now part of the LACMA permanent collection, is this a piece of digital art of a portrait of a famous collector? Depending on your perspective, perhaps both.
Within such a framework, a burned Cryptopunk echoes the poignant loss of other momentous artworks lost throughout history. Picasso’s “Le Peintre” was destroyed in a plane crash; Freud’s “Untitled Oil Painting” fell victim to an accidental garbage crush at Sotheby’s. Many artists have also destroyed their own work intentionally. Both Monet and Richter slashed several of their own canvases, with Richter later expressing regret. Notably, Banksy’s “Girl With Balloon” was transformed into “Love is in the Bin” after the artist intentionally shredded the piece post-auction. Even more pertinently, the BurntBanksy project sold a video of Banksy’s original 2006 screenprint “Morons” being set on fire as a fractional NFT in early 2021.
The loss of these important art pieces strikes a painful blow to our collective consciousness, as they are irreplaceable fragments of our cultural tapestry. However, unlike these lost treasures, burned Cryptopunks are not compromised in the visual sense. Rather, they transition into a form of digital ‘commons,’ disrupting conventional perceptions of ownership and value. Should financial potential alone dictate value, thereby rendering a non-sellable entity worthless? Contrarily, I would argue that such a shift positions cultural value squarely in the spotlight.
When an NFT, symbolizing some collection of exclusive ‘property rights’ to a digital artifact, is burned, it propels us into a complex discourse on ownership, copyright, reproduction rights, and the overarching legal structure of digital assets. Artist Dmitri Cherniak, for instance, played with this paradox in his “Dead Ringers” collection, where each piece was dispatched to a randomly generated wallet address, rendering the NFT effectively ownerless, and at the same time allowing everyone to view and even print out a copy for themselves. The artist stated he considered this a celebration of “birth, life and death” and we can contextualize this duality of owned/unowned by everyone/no one similarly to Schrodinger’s Cat, simultaneously occupying both states.
Digital ownership, as exemplified with NFTs, lacks a clear historical parallel. Unlike museums that possess certain rights to their displayed works, the digital realm operates under a nuanced, distinct set of rules. With no recognized ‘owner,’ the rights attached to these burned Cryptopunks come into question.
The motives behind burning these Cryptopunks, like physical art, vary: accidental—through erroneous address copying or incomplete transaction submissions; deliberate—as a publicity stunt or conceptual commentary. As these digital assets appreciate in value, so does the weight of these actions, amplifying past actions and errors.
As collectors, we are custodians of this art and we should consider the responsibility of safeguarding our possessions for future generations. While traditionally, destruction signifies loss and cultural regression, the implications of such ‘loss’ in the digital space are more open to interpretation. What constitutes ownership and possession in the digital realm, and how do these intersect with monetary and cultural value?
Burned Cryptopunks serve as a potent reminder, a warning, and perhaps a promise. As we traverse digital landscapes, we don’t discard the societal and cultural dynamics rooted in the physical world. Instead, these dynamics transform and amplify, their full implications still unfolding before us.
[this article is cross posted from my new site focused on documenting this – burnedpunks.com]
I am an art collector. This is a confession and a point of pride. I love art, I love seeing art and experiencing art and being surrounded by art. It’s inspiring and makes the world a better place. Here are some observations I’ve had recently that, while unrelated, somehow fit together…
One: I have been collecting art for over 30 years. When my family and I moved to Tokyo from Los Angeles, we put it all in storage with the intent to have it crated up and shipped up once we got settled long term. Visa struggles and what not, that didn’t end up happening so we never shipped the art. Then we moved to Canada and thought we’d get it then – but COVID and border closures threw a wrench into those plans. Now we’re not sure how long we’re staying in Canada so the thought of spending a bunch of time and effort to move art here seems perhaps ill advised. The result of all this, is that the vast majority of our physical art collection is sitting in storage in another country, and we haven’t seen any of it in almost 7 years.
Two: Being an admitted art collector, over that time I’ve continued buying art from artists I love. Many of these pieces were shipped to me rolled up and as any art collector knows you do not want to keep flat art rolled up for too long. In the old days, when I co-owned an art gallery, I had flat files as a safe and secure place to keep unframed art. I no longer have flat files and have committed to framing work so that I can hang it and enjoy it. I recently took about 10 pieces to a local framer and while the results look amazing the multi-thousand dollar bill was a reminder that everything about collecting art isn’t always fun or easy. This print by Sean Higgins looks amazing though.
Three: Once I got those pieces back I had to find room to hang them. In some cases that meant moving other pieces around. This is fun, but also not fun. It’s hard to explain but if you have made a habit out of hanging and rehanging and rearranging art, you know what I mean. If you have any kind of ADHD then you really know what I mean.
Four: When art collectors get together a very common topic is “how do you find new artists?” and earlier this month while I was in Tokyo hanging out at Bright Moments this topic came up a lot. The answer to that question, time and time again, was Deca. I’ve had an account there for a while now but I confess to not really understanding it. After that trip I spent some time exploring and playing with the galleries that you can create, curating collections and art into many different easily browsable pages and I easily made some little galleries showing off some of the photography and generative work I’ve collected, as well as separate galleries for artists like Derech, Piv and Crashblossom from whom I have many works, among others. It’s also incredibly easy to browse around and see what work other people are putting into galleries and quickly find curators or groups you want to follow because you have similar tastes. I’ve really enjoyed looking through the genart group for example. It became very clear to me why collectors are spending time here.
Five: Deca isn’t the only way to show off digital work, I’ve long had a gallery space in Voxels and have enjoyed looking through galleries others have created in OnCyber. I have some OnCyber galleries myself but haven’t had the chance to update them recently. There are at least a dozen other gallery platforms people are using as well. Point being, people are spending a lot of time building ways to curate blockchain based digital art, and collectors are dedicating just as much time to showing off what they have.
Then it hit me.
If I’m out, anywhere in the world, it’s very easy for me to pull up an online gallery and show off artwork that I love. It’s very difficult for me to show off physical work that is hanging in my house (or worse, in storage). If I move (as I’m known to do) it’s very easy (and free) for me to bring my digital collection with me. It’s very hard (and expensive) for me to bring my physical collection with me. Worse if it’s international.
Six: Another thing that became apparent to me in Tokyo while visiting several galleries is how quickly the “digital canvas” products are improving. Currently Whim and Grail and other digital art displays are quite pricey, but Infinite Objects frames are super reasonable and satisfy the object lust thing quite well. And truthfully when you consider professional framing can cost $400 for a single piece, a digital canvas that shows your entire collection being $4000 isn’t insane, it’s steep for sure, but that price will come down over time as well. And as we more museums exploring ways to show off digital artists like Refik Anadol people will continue to get more comfortable with this idea of real art on screens.
Just to argue against myself for a moment, for more than 20 years now I’ve had friends telling me the wonders of dumping their CDs, DVDs, Books etc in favor of digital libraries & streaming. I’ve largely resisted, and while I’ve mostly transitioned to a digital movie library to be honest it’s not the same. I miss scanning the spines of DVDs and being reminded of a favorite film I want to watch again. This is why I still have all my books and vinyl, I can’t imagine not browsing or holding the objects in my hands. But yes, this comes with a cost – both in space around the house and a monetary one if/when I move. Not to mention the stress. But it’s worth it, because if I don’t see these items, if I’m not accidentally surrounded by them, I don’t experience (and enjoy them) the same way.
As someone who has been buying and collecting physical art since the mid 90’s, and loves looking at the texture and process in physical work, I assumed my position would forever be the same here too. I’m not saying it’s changed, but I’m more open to it than I might have been before. I was never opposed to digital art, don’t get me wrong, but I see a much larger use case and adoption potential now than I did say even 5 years ago. Consider these bits of conversations I’ve had recently:
“I never cared about art until 2 years ago when someone gave me an NFT, now it’s all I think about and I’m buying new art almost every week.” – An accountant
“I used to spent money on 5 digit wine, now I buy jpgs.” – A lawyer
“A water pipe broke and flooded my basement, at least 10 large canvas pieces were ruined” – A collector
“I used to go crazy when I was away from the studio, I had ideas and no way to move on them. Opening myself up to working remotely with my iPad, I can’t imagine ever being so locked down again.” – An artist
That last comment piqued my curiosity and it didn’t take long to find out that Procreate, the most popular professional iPad illustration app is primarily used by “younger artists” with official recommendations that it can be used by kids as young as 8, and unofficially as young as 4. While artists today might have a hard time learning new tools (and honestly, they don’t need to), looking ahead 20 years from now, artists who grow up with them aren’t going to think twice about it. They will be making natively digital art already. Qubibi is an artist I learned about in Tokyo and immediately bought a piece from, this is work that couldn’t exist physically.
The problem with digital art has always been provenance – if all copies are the same then where is the motivation to collect an original, of course NFTs and blockchains solve this (as well as many other problems artists have had like attribution, royalties, etc) and again this next generation of younger artists are growing up with this knowledge inherent. While the old people, the “thought leaders and influencers” argue and fret about it, the young people are embracing it and moving forward. The old people will die and the young people will take over, just as always.
And to be clear I’m not arguing for a move from physical art to digital art, I’m just observing that I think the adoption of digital art is going to be massive. As an art collector I’m always excited to walk into someones house (or office) and see an original piece of art and I think in the very near future people will have displays showing off their bad ass 1 of 1 (or small edition) digital art collections. And to people who might worry about the new wave of digital artists putting the physical artists out of work – that’s nonsense. First of all many artists who have successful careers making physical art have easily integrated digital into their world, just as they did prints or any number of other things before. I think the world is big enough for all kinds of art in various formats, and I think the ease and access that digital art provides is going to introduce way more people to art than we could have ever anticipated. I’m also so excited about new opportunities for artists and collectors – for example I’ve been lusting after the hardware customizations by tachyons+ for over a decade and their work inspired a lot of what I did with CMHHTD, recently I learned they were not only making hardware but also now selling digital art produced with their own devices and I was able to buy this piece. I love it, and might have to get an Infinite Objects frame for it.
I’ll always have physical art, I’m not going to pretend otherwise, but if I’m honest, I think it would be pretty amazing to be able to swap out all the art in my house with with a different “exhibition” from my collection with a single click. Lets see where the future takes us.
