Nude Supermodels and More in Sotheby's Sale
On October 9th in New York, Sotheby's will stage a stunning sale of photographs including several nude portraits of supermodels, with work from the likes of Chuck Close, Peter Beard, Robert Mapplethorpe, Helmut Newton and more. One of the top lots is a series of six full frontal nudes of Kate Moss by Chuck Close taken in 2003, estimated at $100,000 - $150,000. Another high-priced draw is a portfolio of 12 semi-nude images of Marilyn Monroe taken in 1962 by Lawrence Schiller, estimated at $50,000 - $70,000. Two Peter Lindbergh portraits of Mick Jagger taken in 1995 are estimated at $30,000 - $50,000. And a nude of Stephanie Seymour by Richard Avedon taken in 1992 is estimated at $20,000 - $30,000, while this relatively tame image of Nadja Auermann by Irving Penn from 1994 is also a relative bargain at $6,000 - $9,000.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
unsaid Sep 29th 2009 8:40AM
All that money just to look at naked bodies.....how sad. Aren't there porn sites for free?
ccppro Oct 9th 2009 1:10PM
There is a difference between porn and art ... or do you consider Michelangelo's David porn? Gauguin's blue nude? Titian's Venus? C'mon guy!
unsaid Oct 9th 2009 3:50PM
Oh, please...don't even compare those artists to those models...give me a break. If we want to appreciate "art" then we can look at our significant others for free at home, how's that? Those works you mentioned meant something to the artist.....think the photographers that snapped the nude models really look at it as anything but a buck?
nordicman23 Sep 29th 2009 9:48AM
Such hype and commercial insanity. Nothing special about these
skinny nudes. Probably better looking women in your town.
rianhenderson Sep 29th 2009 10:59AM
This is news?
djacobs Oct 3rd 2009 8:17AM
must be, you responded to it. ha!
micky eggs Sep 29th 2009 1:46PM
the only photos that would interest me would be semi-nudes of marilyn monroe. i know they are probably on a nude star site, but she is the epitome of ageless beauty. in fact photos of her fully dressed are more sexy than almost all female stars nude due to the innocence yet erotic features of her face. sexiest picture? singing happy birthday to jfk
Joe Sep 29th 2009 11:43AM
No probably about it, there are plenty of better looking women in my town and your town as well. If people want to give away good money for some skin pictures then good for them. What I find really sad are these women who show their stuff for the camera are NO different than a porn "actress" Not only that, most if not all of these women actually believe they are so beautiful and sexy. Sorry, just 2nd and 3rd rate in my book...just very common and easy looking. Well, look at the bright side, you did give people a LITTLE something to post about and laugh at...YOU!
europeandesigner Sep 29th 2009 11:57AM
Squashing a breast.. thats "beauty?"
Jupiter Sep 29th 2009 12:46PM
Nude shots of Kate Moss gather any money? The last time her career hit a speedbump, all she did to get back into the public eye was pose nude in just about every ad she did for the next couple of years. She was all over the place flashing everything she had (and it worked ~ oh, well), so we've all seen it all so many times. What's the big deal?
thelilguy Sep 29th 2009 11:44PM
Give ME the money, & I;ll photoshop anyone u want's face onto any nude picture u like. In fact , I'll do it for 1/2 that price.
Steve Sep 30th 2009 12:17AM
U guys R rite on about how there's nothing about these broads to make their nude pix woth a nickel more than the porn acctresses' pix. The REAL obscenity here is the amount of money ppl pay for those dumb pix.
So, why DO ppl pay ridiculous prices for this junk when U can get all U want for free (& better 2)? Obviously, bec. these are picts of 'LEGITIMATE' models, not 'PORN ACTRESSES'
& just what's the difference bet. the 2, U say? In a word: NOTHING, EXCEPT that stupid ppl w/ guilty consciences & lots of $$, will pay a ton of the stuff just 2 feel a little LESS guilty. & if it's 'legitimate' actresses they're ogling, they don't have 2 feel guilty, rite? After all, it's LEGITIMATE!
Elwood Sep 30th 2009 6:15AM
Geeeee you couldn't pay me to take these dumb pics
chiefcarnes Oct 10th 2009 1:11AM
local, real, not blown up tits are much prettier and very, very much more appealing.
chiefcarnes Oct 10th 2009 1:11AM
a grown woman squezing her own tit, is , by no stretch of imigination, "art". whory maybe, no art.