Marek Claassen: Director of ArtFacts.Net
We introduced a quantitative method to measure how much an artist is embedded in the international art world. We start with long term relationships between artists and galleries or collections that represent them. These are very strong commitments that last very long. We count the number of countries and the number of collections and galleries. And then we look at solo and group shows. The more international artists a gallery or a museum has, the more its exhibitions value. Let’s say that we have an institution like Tate Modern where thousands of artists are collected. If you have a solo show there you get all the points from these artists and your rank will go up extremely. Biennials, group shows work like collections, their value is based on the artists whose works they show. So if there’s an Andy Warhol its value goes up a lot.
4 thoughts on “Ranking of artists”
Outrageous, scandaleous! You are good friens – you are good artist? So clearly does it go?
yes, as Barabasi’s new book (A képlet (in Hungarian) clearly demonstrates. Now I try to learn how Adrian Ghenie (Cluj) became an auction star.
“Artfacts.net calculates the top artists, based on a formula that takes into account how much art they have made, how often they have shown internationally and, most importantly, the quality of the institutions at which they have exhibited. So an artist who shows at Tate Modern and at the Centre Pompidou will automatically leapfrog over one who has a twenty-year record of shows at Cork Street galleries.”
Reblogged this on Péter Érdi: RANKING. The Unwritten Rules of the Social Game We All Play.