Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The auction market for artworks and their physical dimensions: Australia—1986 to 2009

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Cultural Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Within a hedonic pricing model, the preferences of Australian art purchasers are investigated. Emphasis is placed on the impact of an artwork’s dimensions upon its auction price. A salient aspect of this is the first test of the ‘golden ratio’ hypothesis in a market situation. It is concluded that purchasers prefer paintings that deviate from the golden rule. The ‘orientation’ of works (portrait, landscape or square) as well as size also helps determine price. The impact of winning the Archibald portraiture prize (Australia’s foremost art prize) is found to have significant and positive impacts on winning artists’ prices. This suggests that purchasers are not fully informed. In addition, a previously unsuspected relationship between artwork dimensions and Archibald prize winners was found. As well as purchasers’ preferences, the artists’ choices of the dimensions of their artworks are considered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agnello, R. J., & Pierce, R. K. (1996). Financial returns, price determinants, and genre effects in American art investment. Journal of Cultural Economics, 20(4), 359–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. A. (1974). Paintings as an investment. Economic Enquiry, 12(1), 13–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashenfelter, O., & Graddy, K. (2003). Auctions and the price of art. Journal of Economic Literature, 41(3), 763–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Australian Art Sales Digest (2010). http://www.aasd.com.au. Accessed Nov 2010.

  • Baumol, W. J. (1986). Unnatural value: Or art investment as a floating crap game. American Economic Review, 76(2), 10–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjafield, J. (2000). Dalzell’s theorem and the analysis of proportions: A methodological note. British Journal of Psychology, 91(2), 287–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boselie, F. (1984). Complex and simple proportions and the aesthetic attractivity of visual patterns. Perception, 13(2), 91–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boselie, F. (1992). The golden section has no special aesthetic attractivity. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 10(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buelens, N., & Ginsburgh, V. (1993). Revisiting Baumol’s ‘art as a floating crap game’. European Economic Review, 37(7), 1351–1371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Candela, G., & Scorcu, A. E. (1997). A price index for art market auctions. Journal of Cultural Economics, 21(3), 175–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chanel, O., Gerard-Varet, L. A., & Ginsburgh, V. (1994). Prices and returns on paintings: An exercise on how to price the priceless. Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Theory, 19(1), 7–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chanel, O., Gerard-Varet, L. A., & Ginsburgh, V. (1996). the relevance of hedonic price indices: The case of paintings. Journal of Cultural Economics, 20(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czujack, C. (1997). Picasso paintings at auction, 1963–1994. Journal of Cultural Economics, 21(3), 229–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de la Barre, M., Docclo, S., & Ginsburgh, V. (1994). Returns of impressionist, modern and contemporary European paintings 1962–1991. Annales d’Economie et de Statistique, 35, 143–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekelund, R., Ressler, R., & Watson, J. (2000). The “death-effect” in art prices: A demand-side exploration. Journal of Cultural Economics, 24(4), 283–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B., & Pommerehne, W. (1989). Art investment: An empirical inquiry. Southern Economic Journal, 56(2), 396–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburgh, V. (2003). Awards, success and aesthetic quality in the arts. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17(2), 99–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goetzmann, W. N., Renneboog, L., & Spaenjers, C. (2011). Art and money. American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings, 101(3), 222–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, C. (1995). All that glitters: A review of psychological research on the aesthetics of the golden section. Perception, 24(8), 937–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgs, H. (2010). Australian art market prices through the global financial crisis and two earlier decades. (24 May, 2010). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1614645.

  • Higgs, H., & Worthington, A. C. (2005). Financial returns and price determinants in the Australian art market, 1973–2003. The Economic Record, 81(253), 113–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, C. (2009). Australian homes are biggest in the world. Economic Insights, November 30 2009, Commonwealth Bank, http://images.comsec.com.au/ipo/Uploadedimages/craigjames3f61891175551497fada1a4769f74d09c.pdf.

  • Livio, M. (2003). The golden ratio. Review, London.

  • Locatelli Biey, M., & Zanola, R. (1999). Investment in paintings: A short-run price index. Journal of Cultural Economics, 23(3), 211–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macrosson, W., & Strachan, G. (1997). The golden section and the shape of objects. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 15(2), 153–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mei, J., & Moses, M. (2002). Art as an investment and the underperformance of masterpieces. The American Economic Review, 92(5), 1656–1668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mok, H. M. K., Ko, V. W. K., Woo, S. S. M., & Kwok, K. Y. S. (1993). Modern Chinese paintings: An investment alternative. Southern Economic Journal, 59(4), 808–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohta, H. (1999). Preferences in quadrangles reconsidered. Perception, 28(4), 505–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesando, J. E. (1993). Arts as an investment: The market for modern prints. American Economic Review, 83(5), 1075–1089.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesando, J. E., & Shum, P. M. (1999). The returns to Picasso’s prints and to traditional financial assets, 1977 to 1996. Journal of Cultural Economics, 23(3), 183–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renneboog, L., & Spaenjers, C. (2010). Buying beauty: On prices and returns in the art market. Discussion Paper CentER, Tilberg University.

  • Renneboog, L., & Spaenjers, C. (2011). The iconic boom in modern Russian art. Journal of Alternative Investments, 13(1), 67–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renneboog, L., & Van Houtte, T. (2002). The monetary appreciation of paintings: From realism to Magritte. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 26(3), 331–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, P. (2000). Preferences in quadrangles reconsidered. Perception, 29(12), 1413–1422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shortess, G., Clarke, J., & Shannon, K. (1997). The shape of things: But not the golden section. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 15(2), 165–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silvia, P., & Barona, C. (2009). Do people prefer curved objects? Angularity, expertise, and aesthetic preference. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 27(1), 25–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ursprung, H. W., & Wiermann, C. (2008). Reputation, price, and death: An empirical analysis of art price formation. CESifo working paper, no. 2237, Category 9: Industrial Organisation.

  • White, H. (1980). A heteroscedasticity-consistent covariance matrix and a direct test for heteroscedasticty. Econometrica, 48, 817–838.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zanola, R. (2007). The dynamics of art prices: The selection corrected repeat-sales index. Working paper, no. 85, Department of Public Policy and Public Choice, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Accounting, Finance and Economics, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia

    Helen Higgs & John Forster

Authors
  1. Helen Higgs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Forster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helen Higgs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Higgs, H., Forster, J. The auction market for artworks and their physical dimensions: Australia—1986 to 2009. J Cult Econ 38, 85–104 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-012-9197-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-012-9197-z

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation