1. benjamin says

    Why the mention of Leo? Is he the new owner of the Lichtenstein?

    And to say that photo isn’t worth the $4.3 million…well you’re obviously wrong.

  2. Good for a laugh says

    For two million I will fly to Europe and take as many pictures as you like of the Rhine until I get one just like that or better. You provide the camera. Hahahaha, some rich people are so silly!

  3. oliver says

    “I’d like to take a pic of Leo DiCaprio in blue jeans and a blue baseball cap. I’d call it “Blue Boy” and sell it for $5million.

    Posted by: paparazz”

    Heads-up all. If I get a pic of Leo in blue jeans and a blue baseball cap I’m selling it as “Blue Boy II” for $2.5M
    (email me your contact info 😉

  4. anon says

    The weird thing about photographs is you can make more prints, so the price of any should not get that high. Perhaps the negative is gone. What’s the highest price paid for a print of a digital photography?

  5. says

    I guess their is something wrong with someone paying that much for this photo… if I had that amount of bucks, I could feed a lot of starving artist for a very long time! I recall in the early days of MAD Magazine, that they had a story about Talouse La Finkelsteine. He painted only one canvas in his lifetime and was able to sell it for $250,000. He painted it on the back of a Picaso!!!

  6. John Gaddis says

    While I am sure that it is a mesmerizing photograph up close and personal, it is incredulous to me that someone would pay 4.3 million for it. Further, Sotheby’s is holding out against the Art Handlers Union! The auction house hired scabs to handle the art! Sotheby’s is attempting to force their Art Handlers who are on strike to accept lesser pay and a reduction in benefits, all the while setting record auction sales for themselves. The Art world can be a somewhat disgusting arena of players and payers!

Leave A Reply