In my opinion Art.sy is a complete waste of any user’s time. A person would be much better advised to browse through the sites of the world’s major museums – Louvre and Rijksmusem, Amst. are two fine ones, or the Met’s ‘Heilbrunn Timeline.’ If people are interested in the market, in my own opinion (based upon a couple of decades of experience) the single best source for accurate selling prince information would be the French international art auction database available by subscription only, Artprice.com.

What does intrigue me about Art.sy is their PR technique. How has a clearly third rate selling selection dispensed through a slick interface been able to generate articles in reputable periodicals, such as Smithsonian and the NY Times? And, second, why are they, their self evidently false analogy to molecular biology and genetics, and their other claims being treated with respect rather than pointed out as a perfect example of web-hype.

I was expecting a much larger selection from this incredibly prolific artist (and not just FOR SALE) with a great deal more information than a Wikipedia synopsis of his career. when I searched for other artists it was the same obvious and unavoidable sales pitch announcing the financial focus of their pages. it made me wonder: is art.sy just a thinly veiled storefront for selling prints? I was hoping for something far more altruistic than a Pandora-like portal with an iTunes Store architecture.

I joined art.sy to learn more about my favorite artists and discover many more, not to be constantly reminded that they want me to ‘acquire’ works shown on the site. I don’t think the world needs another online sales catalog labeled as some kind of elitist ‘genome project’. so far, Google Images has them beat hands down.

if I’m right, perhaps they should consider changing the company’s tagline to “Making a misleading and very limited online art store accessible to anyone with an Internet connection.”