Artist Creates INVISIBLE ‘Art’ and Collectors are Paying Millions


InvisiArt_Banner

(Above): Art enthusiasts admire Newstrom’s invisible paintings and sculptures at the Schulberg Gallery in New York.

27-year-old artist Lana Newstrom says she is the first artist in the world to create invisible “art.”  In this documentary, CBC Radio traveled to her empty studio to learn more about Lana and her unusual  artistic process.

According to Newstrom, “Just because you can’t see anything, doesn’t mean I didn’t put hours of work into creating a particular piece”.

“Art is about imagination and that is what my work demands of the people interacting with it. You have to imagine a painting or sculpture is in front of you,” says Newstrom.  Paul Rooney, Lana’s agent, believes she might be the greatest artist alive working today: “When she describes what you can’t see, you begin to realize why one of her invisible works can fetch upwards of a million dollars.” said Rooney.

Learn more about Lana Newstrom and her invisible art here:

A screen shot of Newstrom’s website. As expected, the works being exhibited are invisible:

screen shot

What do you think about Newstrom’s invisible art? Let us know in the comments section below!

And don’t forget, if you’re looking for a piece of original art to hang on your walls, check out artFido HERE!

Artists Network

299 Comments

  1. She uses herself n the hearing sense of others to set the tone for the seduction .
    You can imagine anything , if your mad enough , I was imagining Jesus in the room saying here’s free water .but she couldn’t hear him or give him a face either in the crowd .
    Ditto

  2. I think the artist will have a sore throat by the end of the exhibition and be tired.Youl need good listening sense for this and wanting to be entertained .the materials she listed sound unrelated , this a good abstraction .but I could listen to my Mother just as long an be searching for a picture to relate it too .then scrutinise what she wants or needs .
    Usually most people need love and attention, so I guess she’s just pitching her human need in a very heady way .

  3. I just bought one of her magnificent pieces. I’m looking at it now on my blank wall. Do understand, I paid her with invisible money. I think we’re both very happy.

  4. It’s a hoax report based on a photo shopped Shutterstock image of people looking at Phil Stern photography
    collection at Forma Photography Foundation June 16, 2010 in Milan, Italy.

    To see visible art Google ‘Rex Woodmore’ Australian International Artist

  5. if you are paying to see this, investing in it, or giving it any time whatsoever, i don’t mean to be harsh but you are a fucking idiot. straight up

  6. Barnett Newman, Jeff Koons…

    The list of overhyped hacks gets bigger every day.

    These so-called “art collector” morons deserve to
    lose the millions they piss away. Total Idiots.

  7. If ‘you have to imagine a painting or sculpture is in front of you’ then it’s ‘you’ who is creating the ‘invisible art’ not Newstrom – personally I think it’s all a load of pretentious crap (does she accept invisible money as payment?)

  8. One could argue that the viewer is the “artist” not the girl that is claiming to be one. If the people have to imagine how it looks, it’s going to be interpreted different by everyone. That in turn would make them the creator of the piece, not the pretentious idiot claiming to be so. This article belongs on The Onion.

  9. This is dumb. Really dumb. Super dumb. The people could go out on the playground and have these discussions with their invisible friends. No wonder contemporary art has a credibility problem.

  10. I will now ‘imagine’ i never wasted my time listening and reading this utter tosh! She’s not an artist, she’s an actress fooling people into parting with their money!

  11. This is hoax at its best and gullibility at its worst! I heard the following joke five decades ago: Kindergarten student submits her painting assignment. She submits a blank sheet of paper.
    Teacher: What is this?
    Girl: A cow eating grass.
    T: where is the cow?
    G: It ate and went home.
    T:Where is the grass?
    G: The cow ate it.

  12. even if this were not fake, invisible does not mean weightless. If i were to buy something i would weigh the box with and without the supposed artwork. If no difference then a full refund please. Obvious trolling or social experiment.

  13. i am an artist and i take this to be something that has always been happening. take for example you are sitting or standing and looking at a blank wall, what ever image you see on that wall will be something you have already visualize in your mind, she did a good work by making money out of it, , . one thing i know is that ideas like that will only sell among those with the cash.because they are always finding ways to see new things

  14. It’s so obvious this is a joke, guys. I mean.. “It’s heavier than that. Lift with your knees!” in reference to an invisible sculpture. I mean come on! It’s really funny!

  15. Now I have seen everything (also nothing). If she goes to the trouble of imagining the whole thing, why not just MAKE it. Sorry, but this takes conceptual art into the realms of madness (and not in a good way). Also, it is the the final justification for the phrase “People will pay for anything”. Art has officially disappeared up its own ass. R.I.P
    The real idiots are the people paying these millions, not the “artist”.

  16. Wow, I’m never surprised anymore at how stupid people can be. Millions of dollars for nothing? I can imagine the art buyer instructing the moving men that are “carrying” it into their home saying “Please! Don’t drop it!”

  17. to be politically incorrect, this is so stupid….are we the bored society…to me, it’s an insult that she thinks she is doing something wonderful and people are paying for it – “wherever I go, I take my imagination with me”….I don’t need to pay HER for it….

  18. Guys this hole picture is a scam. It is a stock image of a photography gallery in Milan by Phil Stern from which they erased the pictures on the wall. Just tipe “Milan Phil Stern” on Google to see the real picture.

  19. I think there was an article showing the real image this gallery was a photo gallery but they removed the artwork using photoshop but this could just be an image used to go with the article either way it sounds ridiculous but when it comes to arty people I do not call BS straight away as I know they are bunch of fruit loops to varying degrees

  20. This is definitely a shame for artists in the world. Artists create arts to share their creativity, imagination and unique minds. If they’re passionate in painting, their strokes, colour preference, and style will speaks about themselves. Artists used to convey their passion through their artworks, and it has been going for centuries. If this artist is conducting a social experimenting, I hope the news explains so.
    But overall, I’m not sure whether this artist fooled these people or just people who are just fools.

  21. the concept of invisible art object, also an expensive one, is found in the story of the emperor appeared that he had no clothes on.(but actually he bought some expensive clothes that are so thin, so lightweight that you cannot feel, and are transparent, but poeople could not see the clothes). So the concept is not actually new, nothing original I find in this exhibition… :D

  22. I will be a mirror artist then….put some mirrors on the wall…. and walaaaah …. there u have it…. the first mirror artist of the world. I shud get a $billion..coz for gods sake ‘….atleast its not invisible!!

  23. This is where to many Idiots slipped through the doors of Art Circles, Ever hear the term “Bull Shit Baffles Brains” ? Yep, we are seeing this in action here. Hockney me lad you are so Fecken right

  24. No idea if people in here are genuine or not but the radio show is called “This Is That” that airs on CBC Radio. The whole show is sattire. They aired an interview with a man about the need for bilingual dog parks in in Quebec. Calm down everybody.

  25. interesting acting, very good symbiotic sham. As one said, “If I wanted to imagine a piece of art I’d stare at my own wall.” To really try to understand this “type” of “art” her “style” is passé. It has been done in the terms of “mind” art before.. except it was with a tangible object.=..it is a WAY to make the observer “think” past what the object IS and find the talent, craftsmanship, process or just the “thought” of art is art and not the end product or the object itself. She has just taken it one step further and narrates HER “art” in YOUR mind. Since past art movements have convinced us a chair and a toilet is art she has taken it a step further and is really saying that , art is in YOUR mind….but we all know THAT and don’t need to buy it ,we posses it already you just have to draw it out of yourselves….so if someone is that ignorant to need to spend 35,000$ to do that… they really may need help in understand ART period. LOL The first thing I thought was well her other objects in reality must be average or this is a way to get THAT stuff known and say they own a piece from that girl who made a “splash” with “invisible art” interesting marketing tool.

  26. A sucker born every minute. Every one of us has our own imagination. It is not a commodity. It’s unique to each of us. Lana, fooled some eccentric art snob, but not any artist. Maybe this is a prank or some sort of psychological study to see how gullible people attended this BS. It’s criminal. It’s freaking hilarious. But mostly criminal.

  27. Only reason why its invisible is to hide how black her soul is, and to hide how terrible her artwork really is, Art, (Real art) is tangible, relate able and can be actually seen, that is why its called art and not air! anyone willing to pay a single cent for air is just about as dumb as this wanna-be “modern” artist is. |
    Other wise I should just throw away all the years of training, study. heck just burn em all…

  28. this is a joke, and the picture is a fake. you can find the original if you type “MILAN, ITALY – JUNE 16: People look at Phil Stern photography collection at Forma Photography Foundation June 16, 2010 in Milan, Italy.” into your browser. its on shutterstock

  29. This is the logical end of capitalist art. Patrons treat art like widgets to be invested in, that will increase in value as time goes on. Artists catch wind of this, and so they churn out cans of shit and urinals and even imaginary non-pieces, because, hey, they still get paid. Surprise surprise, the rubes lap it up either way because they don’t care one lick about the actual content.

  30. This is pretty out dated work, surprisingly people are still in EEE and Awe! … it was done first in 1958 by Yves Klein… Look up “The Void”(La Vide)… Art history books are friends, not enemy!

  31. People, this is NOT REAL. It’s a JOKE. There is no Schuler Gallery and the image used for this article has been photoshoped. You can find the real image on Corbis, stock photo agency. I think the moral of the story here is: Don’t believe everything you read/see/hear…

  32. Umm… People, the “documentary” group who showcased the installation was “This is That” a well known Canadian SATIRE show presented by the CBC. Wow, people are gullible. You’ve officially been had.

    Source : Canadian

  33. lazy. clever way of so americanly taking money from people with minimal skill or effort. but lazy and self righteous. taking advantage of people by doing jack shit and just being good at making up bullshit. bitch probably had an extensive background of being a self absorbed piece of shit and now uses that for her so called art but its really just about money. this bourgeois garbage is fucking terrible and she should be ashamed. maybe if she was hanging from a noose in the middle of the room with all her invisible bullcrap surrounding her id go see it

  34. I call Bullshit! Not to the “art” itself but I call bullshit that people are paying for it!

    Hey, I have about 10.000 pieces of invisible art,you can have them for 1€ each!

  35. Sad copy. Wasn’t there a postmodern artist that sold 1 m3 air and people bought it? At least he gave out ‘certificates’. This here just seems like a cheap copy of something that should only work once.

  36. The clowns who pay to “see” this nonsense,or worse yet buy “it”, deserve to be liberated from every last cent they ever made or will make. Pet Rock,anyone?

  37. “The Emperor’s New Clothes” of Hans Christian Andersen.
    Though she is not the first to make invisible art. Yves Klein has already played with concept of emptiness

  38. Here is the thing with this: This artist say he is the first one, but that is big bullshit and numerous artists have done the same before. First one Yves Klei in 1958 with “the Void”.. I have done and protected similar thing, as irony in 2003. and James Franco in 2011. There’s more…

    There is no completely unique idea in the world but to say that she is the first one is just pathetic. Somebody can sue her for that, but she is doing enough damage to herself already.

  39. This is complete idiocy. And if it shows volumes on anything it is the stupidity of people and how they will latch on to whatever is being considered “trendy” or “hip” at the moment despite the glaringly obvious bullshit of it. Society breeds sheep who will follow anything no matter how pathetic. This “artist” should be locked up for fraud she is a dumb bitch anyone who believes this crock is fucked in the head. And the subject itself should be considered a crime to even be discussed. Artist involve real talent and she is bringing down the culture of art itself. To all those who see through this good day. To the rest of you who think she is the new great thing. Get sterilized and end the reproduction of idiots

  40. God Damnit, this isn’t a real story. It was made up by CBC who decided to make up a web page to back it up. I wish sites would stop stealing satire and pretending its a real story merely because they can’t source properly.

  41. She’s a self admitted Con-Artist – and her supporters are complicit in the Con – the media is both exploited and the exploiter – willfully! Stupid smart people complicit in cultural confusion – with art that isn’t, art in idea only, – a weaponization of art – and delusion required for perception, group delusion ! The event and the coverage becomes the art – but the event, is only an event – the rest is fecal finger painting! Damn the interest! :-)

  42. I have been wondering lately how many people are to the left of center on the IQ bell curve, and how many standard deviations out. I’ve been wondering for a long time. My interest peaked when I read about people who microwave their cell phones hoping to quickly recharge them. But, invisible art? People imagining artworks? These people are so far to the left of the center of the bell curve I can hear Vizzini (Princess Bride) saying “Inconceivable!!”

  43. Reminds me Cage about his piece ” 4’33” “…
    Cage is great music philosopher but not much a composer. So except his prepared piano sonatas…… there’s not much music in his compositions.
    So I’m sorry, but I have to say you too are not an artist, girl, but just a conceptualist (cause there’re no visible & effective artistic techniques in you’re paintings/sculptures).
    How could you be, as an artist, proud of some air….?

    1. Its satire. Go to “This is That” on CBC and listen to the radio program. Its in the NPR style of soft talk radio and its fucking hilarious. Whoever works at art fido thinks this is funny, but its sort of like stealing content.

  44. This is one of the most pathetic things I have ever seen. What a complete crock of excrement. Good for her for scamming idiots out of their money. There is so much amazing artwork in the world, anyone who puts stock in this should be locked away from society and have the stupid beaten out of them.

    1. well, if you buy a big painting, it has to be in a big, protective box. with insurance. someone must pay for it… you would not expect to come in a letter envelope, even if it looks some invisible…, that would become suspicious…

        1. Well i would assume the rest of humanity uses its senses to perceive what they experience but of course if there is some kind of sense of that can create which the rest of us cannot perceive then i need evidence to prove something is there, my thoughts well be a painter and decorator less complicated.

    1. This is definitely trolling. If I wanted to imagine art on my walls, I can do that myself. I wonder if this exhibit is even real.

      Maybe she’s actually making some kind of social experiment about the affects of status, prestige and hype in the art world.

          1. you are right about the experiment, but weird are the also political echoes of that exhibition

      1. This actually makes sense. First I thought she was just a con-artist, but perhaps your right. the exhibit isn’t the empty canvas, but the room full of people admiring and buying the empty canvas for the sake of status, prestige, etc.

You may also like

More From: Art

DON'T MISS