What is judged to be valuable art?

its rather simple actually, well.....not that simple...if i think harder.

i have seen artworks which are simple and easy to make that sell for millions of dollars.
so i have come to the verdict, that the labour put into a piece of an artwork does not affect the value it has.

an artwork done in any school that includes a large mural painting can be easily out-valued by an artwork done by Piet Mondrain, life is just that....

in my blog entry, i will say about two kinds of "valuable"

valuable to the artist
and valuable in terms of selling the artwork to the market.

in the eyes of the artist, it is definitely obvious that they judge their own handmade creations to be valuable. They created it, they came up with the idea, its a one of a kind work. even artworks done in a series like the ones by Brancussi have individualistic points of each art piece. however, it is the impact that the artwork has done to the artist that determines how valuable an artwork is. for example, the first "splatter" painting by Pollock is valuable to him as it sparked the artist's fame, compared t the black and white paintings in the end which is seen to be not as valuable as that....

valuable in the market.
simply put, it is the relevance to the popular culture that determines the value.
it depends on the demmand. its like a trend, rich people who are ignorant in art, pay large sums just to possess artwork which are all-the rage at a point of time. I believe that the price on artworks fluctuate acording to the time of the society.