Never heard of it.
My own personal opinion: It's a lot of money for a lot of very small prints, most of which I probably wouldn't want to frame and hang.
For a moment, I thought it might be a good thing for those who home-school. But then again, there are so many websites that have the artworks on them.

Never heard of it either, but we get next to no junk mail (we had our names removed from the lists). I agree with Pammy - they are small prints, not worth the money to me. I prefer to choose my own artwork and like to use unique and different things. Not something alot of others would have. There are beautiful *masterpieces*, but in most cases, I'd still prefer something unique.

The link says they are printed on high quality textured paper, which would be much nicer than cardboard :)

tina

I'm by far no expert on art, but yeah, these do look pretty nice. They don't seem small though, not at 13 x 10. It sure is tempting! lol. It is a neat idea for studying art because you actually get to see the picture in person.

I may hang the Monet in my bedroom, then call it a day. :)

Christmas is over. No more impulse purchases!

"It is a neat idea for studying art because you actually get to see the picture in person."

Visit a museum and see the original for a fraction of the cost.

I can't imagine The Daughters of Edward D. Boit by John Singer Sargent in a 13 inch x10 inch print because the original work is about 8 feet x 8 feet. 13 inches x 10 inches is very small, not really worth framing and hanging IMO, unless it's an Albrecht Durer print because his original prints are small but incredibly large in impact. When we were in Boston at the end of November we went to the MFA too see the Durer exhibit. It was absolutely breathtaking and actually brought tears to our eyes. When we returned home we were fortunate enough to have an Albrecht Durer exhibit at Vassar College's Francis Lehman Loeb Art Center, which is about 20 minutes from our home. Take advantage of the culture your city or state offers.

Here is a link that might be useful: Boston Museum of Fine Arts

To each his or her own, I guess, but I think it looks like junk. Every three weeks you get 4 dinky postcards for $15.00?

You'd be better off buying a nice coffee table book and enjoying the "art" that way. Or even buying a poster from Michaels.
It would be good for you to explore artists other than the impressionists and big names too, just to learn and open up your horizons.
One of my all time favorites is Wolf Kahn and he has a lovely book.

I'm lucky to live in a suburb of Washington, D.C., so I have access to great museums. But many people don't; I guess I'd rank online photos and libraries as better alternatives to seeing great art.

The Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam has a beautiful website...chock full of art eye candy. We "visit" it often....hoping to someday get there IRL.

Here is a link that might be useful: Rijksmuseum

Yawn.

Putting on my snobbery hat now. Yes, I will travel across the world to the Louvre between visiting my various vacation homes and squeeze in a week or two browsing. What was I thinking about putting a teenie tiny little ole 13 x 10" picture in a frame?

Taking my snobbery hat off now. You know, if I were to go through life being so pretentious that I can't allow myself something I like to look at because it's not the real deal, then I'd feel sorry for myself because I'd be missing so many little things in life.

Bumble, thanks for the good advice about getting an art book or two. I am fascinated with the masterpieces, and even those I've never heard of.

However, I still think is is a GREAT idea to buy if one is wanting to learn art and the history of the work and painter. Framing is only an option, the back of each print is full of information.

One more thing, I have a box of REAL size "post cards" in immaculate condition, never used which by the way are antiques, all of them are copies of masterpieces. I have about several hundred of them. I gave them to my son and he enjoys them immensely.

Once again you asked for our opinions and you got them. Not everyone will jump on your bandwagon. Some will give you their honest opinions because we are a very honest bunch. No one is suggesting you travel around the world to the Louvre. Most metropolitan areas have museums and are accessible within a few hours' drive.
To call people who visit museums and appreciate seeing art up close and personal pretentious is a bit high-handed. I prefer to think of them as well-rounded.

Well, this is getting hot! Oakley - if this is the best way for you to enjoy and learn about fine art, then do it! I am all for learning to love art as an avocation, in whatever way suits the person best. In our house there are some very nice oil and watercolor originals on the walls, as well as prints, posters, lithos, and gasp, some framed postcards and a calendar picture. In our bedroom I just hung a 2010 calendar with twelve of Vermeer's loveliest paintings. I may frame a couple of those after our MBR redo.

I agree that visiting a museum is the best way to look at great pictures. However, with my horrible back pain, I couldn't make it through more than one or two rooms without a Tylenol-3 or two, which would turn me into a slug-brain. And the nearest decent gallery/museum is almost 400 miles away, in L.A.

Here's an additional suggestion, Oakley. There is the most wonderful BBC series, called "The Private Life of a Masterpiece", available on Netflix. It's about $75 on Amazon. It's by far the best thing I've ever seen on film on this subject. Each DVD studies three or four great works of art, describes its location, history, style, the artist's life, and has a tremendous musical score as well. When I watched the first one, I called DH in to have a look; he said "No, don't think so", but eventually he wandered in, sat down, and loved it. We plan to buy the series. DH is a History Channel - WW2 kind of guy. When I first met him and we were having coffee, he declared "I hate art". Having already spotted him as DH material, I smiled and thought to myself "When I get through with you, you will love it." And he does. He thinks he's all sophisticated now because he discovered Gustav Klimt, and so now we have a Klimt nude mousepad. LOL.

Whatever it takes, is my motto. Do consider the BBC series.

sable, that looks very interesting, what a good suggestion.

oakley, artspan.com has a lot of portals that give a lot of info on the old masters. This link gives you visits to many museums.

Your idea about buying a good book is excellent, as opposed to spending 200$ a year for the art of the month club.

Putting on my snob hat now:

Seeing the Mona Lisa in person was my most disappointing art experience
ever. The Louvre does not stop tourists from photographing it, although there is a sign that says not to. I glimpsed at it from a distance and walked on by.

The Sistine Chapel ceiling was my most amazing and moving experience as far as being in awe of seeing it in person.
Or maybe I was just light-headed and hungry, lol.....
You are packed like sardines in that room, and a guard keeps reminding people to be silent ( and of course, they mumble loudly anyway)

Seeing Monet paintings in person at Musée Orsay, priceless.
We were there off-season and it was a quiet morning, that helps.

Here is a link that might be useful: Visit the Louvre free !!!!!

Mitch, I agree about the Orsay vs Louvre, and it had so many of my other favorites, like Cezanne and Pissarro.

Have you been to the Monet Marmottan museum? It has Sunrise that started all the critical madness. We loved the mansion, period furniture, and, of course, all the art. Beautiful neighborhood to take a stroll in, too. Does any other city have as many parks? :)

Sister Wendy is available on Netflix, as well as Amazon.

I'm not suggesting that art can't be enjoyed or appreciated via reproductions, but I'm extremely leery of the scholarship presented in some mail-order doohickey.

Ever read David Hockney's book about the use of optical devices by painters? Eye-opening no pun intended.

"For two years Hockney seriously investigated the painting techniques of the old masters, and like any admirable sleuth, compiled substantial evidence to support his revolutionary theory. Secret Knowledge is the fruit of this labor, an exhaustive treatise in pictures revealing clues that some of the world's most famous painters, Ingres, Velázquez, Caravaggio (just to mention a few) utilized optics and lenses in creating their masterpieces."

His book is "Secret Knowledge:Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters".

Here is a link that might be useful: Sister Wendy on Amazon

A good basic book, used in many schools and colleges is the Janssen Art History Book. Ilearned a ton from it, and still refer to it years later.

Considering that I live within moderate walking distance from a world class art museum, and 90 minutes from NYC., I feel relatively underexposed to the real thing.

I wonder if anyone else here went to the Century show at the Whitney in 1999-2000. All American artists, Part I from 1899-1950 part II from 1950-1999. I had seen *much of this work in books, but I have gotta tell you, it doesn't compare to the original, and I don't mean that the original is always "better".

But the original gives you a better understanding.

I remember growing up (and as a non-producing, frustrated painter) feeling quite jealous of some of these guys who created these "masterworks" and then realized they did it when they were 22. Sometimes, the real thing, painted on cardboard, in paint that is not very archivally sound, and much Smaller than the *presence* it conveys, in a book--really let me know, yep, this was a kid who painted this, and the genius is in the INTENT, but not necessarily the technical.