This reminds me of that experiment Joshua Bell had where he was in incognito, playing his million dollar Stradivarius. The main headline for that one was that people in the streets doesn't appreciate "fine art" and can't recognize true talent and art when presented like that. You know what i think? I think certain people are getting hyped up by media, when they in many cases, are not as special as people would like them to be. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying either of these two are bad artists, quite opposite, i like them both. But this experiment shows the raw, naked view of people, without being pushed opinions on them, and we see the result. Now the question lingers... is it the exposure that is the problem? Or is it the fact that the masses are that easily persuaded?

#1 Agree. If something is not puted inside our brains for the media, that´s because is not worth it. In the other hand if the media present us with the bigest crap everybody would just aplaude and say Woow. That`s were we live and it happens with everything since art, to music and cinema, etc, etc...

Well, but... I always thought that his art was about painting a specific image in a specific place, as some sort of, I dunno, manifesto... as some sort of expressing his feelings about the object/area his works referred to. Nowhere in his work he made it look like he's been doing all that just for money. Now, selling just bare images, cut out of any context... I'd say, if somebody bought anything that would mean they missed the point of his art altogether. Collecting "street art" reproductions in your home on your wall seems weird to me.

Just goes to show that talentless 'spray art' means nothing except to the 'enlightened' academics and 'experts'. wouldn't give 60 cents for one of those.

$420 ...... Seriously why do I keep seeing this number I mean even the video length 2:40

reminds me of religion