Deployer
@deployer
I've seen mixed reactions to Zora combining pictures and tokens. I could be wrong but this feels ... right. It's fascinating. Its like fractionalizing NFTs without having to fractionalize a thing. You can own a lot or you can own a little. You can flex being the biggest holder, or you can just support your favorite artist with $5. The only thing that separates this from existing 1/1s or open editions is how platforms display them. By owning any amount of these tokens you own "the picture". The amount you put in is up to you. I get the sense artists hate this because it further pushes art into some kind of financial asset, but this is fascinating and I hope more artists use it and it catches on. NFTs were always financial. Artists wanted a new way to monetize their work. They required a mental leap to embrace a new concept of ownership. Seems like that is also the case here. This solves the royalty debate. I assume the artist earns fees on every swap.
24 replies
34 recasts
174 reactions
0xen 🎩
@0xen
main 'problem' i see is that fractions are basically infinite so you can still own the picture even if you buy .00000000000001 of the coin.
2 replies
0 recast
9 reactions
Deployer
@deployer
honestly i'm fine with it. like if my favorite artist made one of these and i had a dope digital art frame in my house and i could still proudly display the art and say "i own 0.00069 ETH worth of that". i'd be happy. like you can still take part in the ownership. the artist still gets paid. the only thing missing is the display.
1 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
0xen 🎩
@0xen
right, that's kind of my point, you undercut your floor massively and that's maybe not great for artists trying to make a buck
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions