Awesome animations, but the NFT sale link got me to close the tab and stop exploring, thinking this is just some spam trying to scam more people.

Not a fan of NFTs either but this is the ideal use for the medium, right? It's like the fine art market but for digital assets, except it's better than the fine art market because we all get to enjoy the art just as much as the person who paid to own it.

The artist sold their work. You could argue that the concept of digital "ownership" is in itself a scam, but that's up to the buyer to decide. It's not like there's a call to action that you can't be e-cool unless you buy a NFT.

> Not a fan of NFTs either but this is the ideal use for the medium, right?

He's essentially being paid to encourage FOMO among other artists so that the hype train continues and people continue to throw their money into the space. It's 2021's fresh take on the influencer model, but instead of shilling weight-loss pills they're shilling crypto. Is that a noble pursuit? The answer generally depends on whether you hold crypto or not.

You can direct the same criticisms to the fine art market. What painting is worth millions without the allure of prestige and exclusivity?

I hold no crypto and have no intent to do so, but artists actually getting paid for their work for once is a win in my books

> artists actually getting paid for their work for once is a win in my books

Does the source of the money not matter? Millions of people, many of whom are artists, are being scammed out of their money to pump the value of ETH, but since some artists are getting paid with the proceeds, everyone is absolved. That doesn't sit right with me.

I follow this artist on Twitter and NFT is what let them quit their day job and make these animations full-time. I don't like NFT (and I don't have any) but I think this might be one of the few positive effects of people buying NFTs.

I agree with the sentiment about NFT's, but not because of the concept, but the current day implementations. NFT's on blockchains that aren't decentralized or permissionless are a farce. I do see a future for provable ownership of digitally native art or in-game objects on Bitcoin.

Congratulations to anyone who has been able to convince someone to buy an NFT (commiserations to the buyer), but I can’t help but feel a simple donation/patron system is a far superior method of supporting artists.

If NFT art becomes common place I don't see it generating more money than the donation/patron system today too. Part of the reason people make huge amounts with these early art NFTs is because people are throwing money into the novelty of NFTs, not from valuing the art. If you wanted to give an artist $1m (like this artist has gotten), there wasn't really anything stopping people from doing it before NFTs.

But if the NFT buyer believes that they could sell the NFT to some other person in the future for more money, then they would buy it from the artist today. This same person would not donate this money.

So selling NFT is indeed a separate source of revenue from donations.

This is a magical make believe situation that NFT people cooked up to pretend that NFTs could have value. It's very unlikely that this make believe situation will actually pan out in reality because then you're making a weird art trade market where people are reselling novelty. And then the only value the artist gets relies on a nonsense "revenue sharing" of NFTs where each resale gives back a portion to the original creator. Which doesn't even make sense because then the value of the NFT has to fluctuate so that people can recoup their losses/get actual gains.

> This is a magical make believe situation that NFT people cooked up to pretend that NFTs could have value

it's the same magic value assigned to art pieces themselves.

It doesn't matter whether those buyers of NFTs make a profit or not - i don't care. I personally don't believe NFTs have value, but i can understand how other people could believe they do.

it will stick, I suppose. Perfect thing to supersede high art sales for money loundering/tax optimisation etc

I don't really like/get NFTs either but the artists are legitimate - as is Deekaykwon, who is very active on Twitter. Not a scam.

An artist monetizing their work is a perfectly legitimate use case for NFTs.

Sounds like something other than thinking.

The second animation has recently sold for one million dollars!

https://twitter.com/CozomoMedici/status/1512235251585626112

Sounds like someone who’s trying to hype themselves up enough to justify why they spent $1m on a JSON file with a link in it. I mean, it’s a cute and well-made animation, but if you feel like this is a piece “that made people start thinking about art again”, maybe you need to get out of the NFT bubble.

These animations are incredible.

Still can’t believe the price that people are paying for NFTs. I’m all for dropping money on art, but when inflation is at “8.5%” and you see the amount of money these are selling for…

I wonder if 'Right Click Save As' is a comment for NFTs!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gGveautRr4

I love the snap and flow of these animations. So crisp, how does one learn to animate like this? Practice, I'm sure. Another animator whose work I enjoy is kekeflipnote.

I'm most impressed that a page with 100 MB of GIFs loaded and animated smoothly for me.

Gorgeous, if only they could be framed and hung in a national gallery somewhere.

Would love to see an art gallery of digital paintings with high-quality displays. Surely this is already a niche thing somewhere.

Sure you can do it online, but I think it'd be neat to walk around looking at .webms like you'd look at physical paintings. (and not in the metaverse please)

Indeed already common

Just need a warehouse, some 8k screen and keg....right ?

Sounds like a serious downgrade in accessibility

Excellent animations! Simple, colourful & packed with a punch!

awesome