I must admit that from the outset I was never a fan of NFTs. While I get the concept and do accept that it takes talent to produce supreme digital art many NFTs seem to fall short of this. Furthermore, while there might be some kind of weird cuteness to pixelated art, why would I, in most cases, even consider a simple pixelated avatar (head only) that has even less sophistication than the kind of graphics an Atari 2600 was capable of in the 1970s and 1980s?

Is it simply the artist. After all Tracey Ermin devised an unkept bedroom which every teenager in the world is capable of producing but it was only considered art because of her name.

Bullshit!

Furthermore, we need to factor in the impact of AI. I recently saw a news story about a number of wildlife artists who were complaining about how AI is ruining the authenticity of their art. In the specific example they were talking about painting / drawing tigers and how AI was reproducing something of the same standard by simply scanning the web and sampling different elements before producing a compound image that was ultimately machine generated.

Here is an image I generated in less than five seconds using a free AI program. You can actually just about tell that it is not authentic, but it is still very good (in the sense of what it represents – not as a piece of art).

Another argument is that despite the minting process such images could easily be screenshot and duplicated without there being any real artistry being involved.

There was a craze, a fad if you like that, when NFTs were selling for ridiculous sums of money.

All for a pointless pile of pixels.

In my next post I will offer further compelling evidence to support my view.

(BTW I think it is crap even though it took a bit longer than the tiger to make!)

Signing out.

As always stay safe and well my friends