Jump to content

Osipova moving into NFTs


Recommended Posts

Well this is a new one on me so sadly I can't Jane!

 

The only thing I can think is that what you would buy at the auction would give you a link to the recording that would be yours in perpetuity but that would not be shareable.  Some years ago I donated to a crowd funder and was then provided with a link to watch the film of the performance.  This would be my assumption but if anyone can really explain please do enlighten us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jan McNulty said:

 

The only thing I can think is that what you would buy at the auction would give you a link to the recording that would be yours in perpetuity 

 

It's a big enough pain in the bottom trying to watch that ballet film featuring, among others, Claire Calvert and Alexander Campbell that was only available via Apple. I still haven't been able to watch it properly on my telly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So basically, it's like buying a DVD/Blu Ray but you also have the rights for the film?

 

I understand the value then of the 1 new piece (if it's any good), but what makes the 2021 recordings of 2 Giselle pieces (solos?) more valuable than any others, unless this is the first filmed version since her performance with Acosta.  Will this really become a high value asset like the work of Ashton which is being painstakingly pieced together? 

 

I find this somewhat mindblowing and you would have to have an awful lot of money to be enticed by  this sort of work which would likely be filed away rather than on view...

I wonder if NFTs are just a case of Emperor's new clothes...

 

P.S. I am in my early 40s and work in a relatively digitally driven industry so if I don't get it....

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgot to add a note on the Guardian sub header -

Natalia Osipova hopes to ‘broaden appeal’ of ballet by selling unique digital copies of performances

 

How exactly does this broaden the appeal of ballet rather than perpetuate it as an elite art?

 

 

 

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Lizbie1 said:

They're one of those things I have filed under "don't understand so won't buy".

 

 

It seems NFTs are now a catch all term for digital media because Osipova's are straightforward ownership of a unique video. What I don't get are things like owning somebody's tweet.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put it simply, its a way to make money from chumps (or those who believe in the idea of a digital metaverse). 

 

Technically, you do not necessary own the underlying rights to the work by owning an NFT (you usually do not). You also can't necessarily stop other people from sharing whatever the NFT is (many NFTs are for images or things you could just download on your computer). 

 

NFTs can however be traded to other chumps for more money (crypto of course). There is an idea that when big tech creates the metaverse (where you live your life inside a digital world), NFTs will be a part of that and in that situation they could indeed be unique assets to your digital self. 

 

There is a a lot of money to be made in this 21st century tulip fever. All the best to Natalia! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The performance in Mexico of the duet with Jason was freely available on YouTube for a number of months (now removed), so no doubt someone has copied it and will repost at some point.  Of course the recording for the NFT version may be different.  If not, the Youtube copy will render the NFT valueless.  Wish I’d copied it now!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, bangorballetboy said:

I really don't think these are aimed at us ballet lovers, rather at rich Russians with more money than sense.

 

Ooh, how I'd love to be a rich Russian (or rich anything) with more money than sense! On second thoughts, keep the money bit but not sure that sense for money is such a good trade. Or is it?????

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/11/2021 at 16:02, Jane S said:

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2021/nov/29/royal-ballet-dancer-natalia-osipova-to-auction-worlds-first-ballet-nfts

 

And please, if someone could explain in VERY SIMPLE LANGUAGE what would be the point of buying one of these, I'd be very grateful.

I thought Jane S said explain what they are, but then realised she said what the point of buying, so I gave up, haha, as I don’t even understand the point of buying NyanCat for $500,000, or buying music from Grimes or any artist at that price. If I had $500,000 to spare, I would rather buy a limo ride to the Opera House and back home every show for a year (to avoid rushing for trains), plus extra ballet tickets.

 

I don’t think Natalia is hoping to make it rich this way, but just to experiment with something new. I think normal prices (from what the teens tell me), are more like £1 to £2 per NFT. Natalia is quite adventurous at trying new things. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Scheherezade said:

 

Ooh, how I'd love to be a rich Russian (or rich anything) with more money than sense! On second thoughts, keep the money bit but not sure that sense for money is such a good trade. Or is it?????

Are we allowed to pick both sense and money?? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So these tokens are non-fungible - but if I wanted to funge one, how might I do so?  My 1970s OED is silent on the matter of the verb from which one might presume the word descends.  (Its definition of 'fungible' is, I would say, so technically explained as to be vague in the extreme.)  Have we any fungers on the Forum?  Is there a training course at a reputable institution for which we might apply?  One likes to know these things.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ian Macmillan said:

So these tokens are non-fungible - but if I wanted to funge one, how might I do so?  My 1970s OED is silent on the matter of the verb from which one might presume the word descends.  (Its definition of 'fungible' is, I would say, so technically explained as to be vague in the extreme.)  Have we any fungers on the Forum?  Is there a training course at a reputable institution for which we might apply?  One likes to know these things.

Haha, Ian! It means it’s unique. No, I don’t know why tech fans can’t just say unique. Then again, I really don’t see the point of TikTok either, but apparently billions of people love it. 

 

I think ballet might be harder to turn into an NFT, which basically is just a unique quirky (or bizarre, in some cases) digital photo or digital picture - or video. 

 

Where they would appeal, I think, is if you had a unique digital picture of a cute cartoon cat or some animal that you just produced for one person and not for someone else. Or a short video of the cute cat dancing or something.  The person who buys the NFT can copy it for his or her friends. But nobody else is allowed to copy and sell it. Not sure how this could be policed if you’re just sharing and plagiarising the photo on your phone or laptop...

 

Only thing is, since digital art is so easy to draw and manipulate with the touch of a mouse and some software, I really don’t see why anyone would pay more than ? 50p ?two quid for it, plus the hassle of dealing with cryptocurrency, when they or a teenager could easily create their own pictures. 

 

Maybe it’s the publicity value - if Natalia is known forever as the first ballerina doing NFTs, it can attract more sponsors for her company? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Emeralds said:

 The person who buys the NFT can copy it for his or her friends. But nobody else is allowed to copy and sell it. Not sure how this could be policed if you’re just sharing and plagiarising the photo on your phone or laptop...


 


I think the idea is that’s the rightful owner of the unique piece is registered. What they then do with it is up to them. If they put it out in to the public domain then what other people try to do with it would realistically be out of their hands. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Ian Macmillan said:

So these tokens are non-fungible - but if I wanted to funge one, how might I do so?  My 1970s OED is silent on the matter of the verb from which one might presume the word descends.  (Its definition of 'fungible' is, I would say, so technically explained as to be vague in the extreme.)  Have we any fungers on the Forum?  Is there a training course at a reputable institution for which we might apply?  One likes to know these things.

Ha ha, it sounds like something from Lewis Carroll, doesn't it!


'Twas brillig, and the slithy tove

Did funge and gimble in the wabe;

All mimsy were the borogroves,

And the tutus outgrabe.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ian Macmillan said:

So these tokens are non-fungible - but if I wanted to funge one, how might I do so?  My 1970s OED is silent on the matter of the verb from which one might presume the word descends.  (Its definition of 'fungible' is, I would say, so technically explained as to be vague in the extreme.)  Have we any fungers on the Forum?  Is there a training course at a reputable institution for which we might apply?  One likes to know these things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fungibility

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...