Waiting To Be Signed · interviews on generative art, on-chain
← Index
Interview // MAR 2022

Kaloh

Title: Interview with Kaloh
Role: Generative artist
Platform: fx(hash)
Duration: 52m
Hosts: Will & Trinity
Listen on Spotify Guest on X Guest website Download MP3
#004 · Interview with Kaloh
Self-hosted audio // press play
52m
MP3 ↓

Spot an error? Highlight the words or lines you want to fix — an “edit” button appears, and the panel opens with your selection ready to edit.

Will: All right, hello and welcome again everyone to a special bonus episode of Waiting to Be Signed. I'm here with co-host Trinity as always, and this week we have a special guest, Kaloh, from Twitter, from his newsletter, from Spain. I'll let you introduce yourself. I think you're a big character in the NFT space — maybe you can let us know how you got involved, what brought you to NFTs, fx(hash), Tezos, all the above.

Kaloh: Thanks for the invite and for doing this — I think it's a great podcast, and we need more of this kind of content. I'm known as Kaloh, and I've been writing a newsletter called Kaloh's Newsletter for around eight months now. I'd always wanted to write — I'd written blogs about baseball and stats in the past, but I never stuck with anything as long as this. My background is in technology; I'm a software developer, and I've worked in tech for around eight years doing software development, data science, and product management. I've always been interested in new technologies, and that's how I got into the crypto world, and later into NFTs. Now I'm also a collector, and I've released some of my own NFTs. But the main thing I'm doing now is the newsletter.

Trinity: That's amazing. Obviously eight months ago is way longer than fx(hash) has been around, so when did you actually get into NFTs? Was it an entry point where you saw the space, loved it, and started your newsletter? What's your journey through the space been like?

Kaloh: I discovered crypto a long time ago — 2013, so about seven years ago. I actually wrote an article about how I was mining Bitcoin with some colleagues at the office. But I stopped and didn't come back to crypto for about five years. Then last year, in early 2021, I started reading about Ethereum and all the dApps you could build on top of that blockchain, and I found it much more interesting than just Bitcoin. I started playing around, building small things in my free time.

Then in March, NFTs hit the headlines because of the big sales, and it was hard for me to understand what was going on and to find good sources explaining it — both the broader ecosystem, DeFi, and how NFTs specifically worked. It took me a while to get my head around it. I had some free time and wanted to do something with it, so I said, okay, I'll just start writing along the way. I didn't have a plan for what I'd write about, or whether it would be weekly, daily, or monthly — I just went with the flow, and it started to grow. There wasn't much content around at the time, so it started picking up subscribers, and I discovered Twitter and took it from there, just naturally writing about what I found interesting.

Trinity: Has it always been market-focused? That's really been your focus, at least as it pertains to Tezos. What was your early content about? The market back then was just crazy volatility — nobody knew what was happening.

Kaloh: My first articles were more about artists — writing about NFTs I liked and the art behind them. Then I started collecting PFP projects on Ethereum and wrote about that experience. I collected Pudgy Penguins, which went from nothing to over one ETH each within a week, so I wrote the story of that — from the moment I minted them to when I sold some. That got me digging into the economics, the return on investment, but I also wrote about the community aspect — meeting people online, what it means to be part of a community, projects that have a real goal beyond just making money. That was probably the first two or three months.

Then fx(hash) came around in November, and volume was very high — it very quickly became an important marketplace on Tezos. As I was collecting, I couldn't find information: how are things going, up or down, what was the price last week, am I doing well or not? So I started tracking it for myself. I was writing about what I was doing and learning, and I started posting Twitter threads with market analysis just to inform people what was going on. As I got more confident, I started adding insights — what I thought could happen, what was driving prices. People liked that because, again, it was needed; there weren't many resources doing it. fx(hash) has since evolved and added more statistics — leaderboards and so on — but it's still hard to cover everything, and I think it's best when external sources support that too. It can't just be the platform doing it; you need outside voices covering these things as well.

Will: That's one of the reasons we wanted to have you on — our show is trying to do something similar, not just through our own discussions of market trends and what we observe in Discord, but also looping in artists and recapping the week, because it's so hard to remember what happened two or three weeks ago. It feels like ages. Before we get into it — the focus of this episode is really the market, so let's do the disclaimer we forgot: none of this is financial advice. This is just us talking about fx(hash), the platform we know and love. Please don't trade or make decisions based on anything we say.

Before we get into the market discussion, I wanted to give you a chance to talk about the project you released recently — which, congrats, sold out really quickly and has had quite a bit of secondary activity. I also saw you putting some curated pieces up on OBJKT. Was that your very first NFT creation, or just your first generative piece?

Kaloh: Thanks for the shout-out. I've created NFTs in the past — some of my newsletter editions I minted as NFTs, sort of like you could mint my newsletter. But I feel like the marketplaces aren't really there yet for written content, so I stopped after a while. I also worked on a project called UniBots, where I mostly handled communications and the technical side, like the smart contract, while the art was done by two artists — Multivac from Argentina and Datcel from Mexico. That was more of a PFP, community-driven project.

Then I made Impossible Sneakers, which I released a couple of weeks ago. I was very excited — the whole process was fascinating, putting myself in the shoes of the artist and coding it. I learned a lot, from the initial idea all the way to the final algorithm, and then seeing the reception. I wasn't expecting it to mint out in forty seconds. I made it a small collection on purpose — I didn't want five hundred or a thousand pieces, so it was seventy-five. Creating a generative collection is complicated — you have to account for a lot, run many tests, and look at many iterations to understand what's happening. You can't judge it one output at a time; you lose the feel of how the whole collection looks together. You need to view them in batches, like fifty at a time, trying different outputs. Getting feedback from my readers on Twitter was also great — I tried the build-in-public approach, sharing my progress over time and seeing what people thought, whether they liked it, what ideas they had. That was very rewarding, getting feedback while I was still coding it.

Impossible Sneakers — Kaloh

Will: Very similar to what we've been doing with the podcast — releasing an NFT on fx(hash) once a month as a way to fundraise so the community can support the show if they enjoy it. It was really rewarding — Trinity, you were away when this happened — someone in the gallery section of the Discord posted a picture of their gallery with one of our fractal NFTs in it. I said, "Oh, thanks for supporting the podcast," and they said, "I don't even listen to the podcast, I minted it because I thought it was cool." Which made me think, okay, two and a half months of learning p5 is starting to pay off. Super cool that you went down that same path into creating. I assume you use p5?

Kaloh: Yes, just p5. I feel like you could use other libraries, but I wanted to stick with just p5, and I still want to master it. There's so much more to try and learn, and before adding anything else, I'd like to get better at p5 first.

Trinity: From what I've seen, p5 just goes so deep — it's basically a question of how much math you want to apply to it. I'm assuming with your programming background you were already very familiar with JavaScript, and p5 was more about learning a new way to think about it?

Kaloh: I actually worked a lot with Java early on, which is similar to JavaScript, but I didn't do much frontend work — I was always more in backend roles and data science, where you don't pay much attention to the frontend. At most it's some charts, a presentation to explain what you discovered. I never really worked in UI or UX — I did some raw mockups, but never the creative part. That's something I'm learning now, and I'm really enjoying it.

Will: That'll be the p5 corner of the podcast — first time we've really talked openly about that on the show. Let's transition into fx(hash) markets and trends. It's been an interesting time on the platform — February especially, but really starting with the new year, we've seen a general slowdown in pace. Every week seems to bring fewer new drops from artists, artists taking longer between releases or drifting away from the platform, lower volume across the board — not just on fx(hash), but seemingly globally. There's a lot going on. What's your current take on the state of the market, and where do you think NFTs in general, or fx(hash) specifically, might be headed in the coming weeks or months?

Kaloh: It's very hard to say, because it's still a very new space -- a completely greenfield. I think the best way to predict what could happen is to look at Ethereum, which has been around a bit longer. What I've seen there is that there are trends, ups and downs, cycles. The NFT space, regardless of what kind of art or platform you're on, is driven a lot by hype and news -- certain triggers cause more traffic to flow to one platform or another.

Impossible Sneakers — Kaloh

fx(hash) started out impressively. In less than a month the platform was around, we already had many artists and collectors, and something like 60-70% of projects were minting out. When something grows that fast at the beginning, it's hard to maintain that rhythm -- it's not sustainable for those numbers to keep happening every day. I think we're in a more stable zone now. We need to look at volume, but we also need to look at the numbers in terms of users: how many new artists, how many collectors, how many unique wallets are on the platform. That's growing constantly. Every time I do my analysis, we're up on a weekly basis -- probably 5 to 15% monthly. Those are great numbers. If we keep that rate for a year or two, we'll be in a great spot in terms of users. The volume is a little down compared to the peaks, but averaged out, it's still going up.

A good comparison is Ethereum versus Tezos. I was running some numbers the other day, and Tezos volume is still about 1% of what Ethereum's is right now. Of course, there are some very high-value collections on Ethereum driving that volume -- the Apes, and all these over-10-ETH collections. But imagine if Tezos just grows to become 5% or 10% of Ethereum -- we'd be looking at 10x, 20x of what we have at the moment. And fx(hash), being the only generative art platform with this solid community of artists and collectors, will get noticed even faster -- volume will grow from month to month much quicker. So yes, something to think about. I like to compare things, track key stats monthly -- number of users and number of artists. I think that's what's most important.

Will: I used to focus a lot on the number of wallets or users metric, but now I'm starting to feel like, paradoxically, the number of users goes up while our volume goes down. I wish there were some way to track on-chain activity that measured frequency -- only counting wallets that interacted daily or every other day. Because it's really hard to know how many of those wallets have been inactive for two, three, four, six weeks, but they're still counted. It shows growth, but there's this well-known whale from back in December, Darold, who hasn't been around, and everyone's like, "Where's Darryl?" But he's still counted. He's in there.

Trinity: He's actually counted twice.

Will: He's got other Darryls. It's one of those tricky things -- I agree the platform is growing overall, but we lack a really meaty metric to get our hands around what's going on. It's a hard question -- sorry, I threw you a "what's going to happen in the future" question, which is a big no-no in crypto.

Kaloh: About two months ago, when fx(hash) was getting all this attention, a lot of the people collecting there were coming from Ethereum, and they expected fx(hash) to reach the same floors and volume Art Blocks had at its peak last year. That's very hard -- Art Blocks' volume was crazy high, very hard to replicate. When they saw that wasn't going to happen in the short term, they kind of left. They were expecting that from one month to the next we'd see a new Fidenza on Tezos that everybody wants to collect, don't miss out. But it's going to take more time for that to happen.

Fidenza — Tyler Hobbs

Trinity: When you're expecting these giant floors and then you leave, you're kind of preventing that floor rise from happening. A lot of floors have been at their highest when we have the most active and ardent collectors, and obviously you don't want to be the person single-handedly pulling the floor up as you buy higher and higher -- but it's an interesting market action to look at from a long-term perspective. It would make sense that being early on fx(hash) means something different than it did for Art Blocks back when NFTs were at the tippy-top of their height. Buying an Art Blocks piece for 8 tez and holding it long-term seems like a no-brainer. So the fact that people would just leave the platform altogether, instead of buying on the primary or picking things up on the secondary when they're getting flipped really low, is an interesting chain of events.

Kaloh: I collect mostly because I like the art. I feel like these NFTs might go up in value at some point, and maybe I'll sell them -- that's great -- but a big part of my portfolio, I have because I like it, and that's not the general case. Most people in NFTs are here to make money, to flip and get gains. Those people will probably find opportunities elsewhere, on other chains or whatever the hot platform of the month is -- they're just jumping around chasing investments. But the people who stay, and the ones joining now, are here because they like the art or like to create it. Those are the ones fx(hash) wants around long-term, because they'll be here regardless of the floor, regardless of whether volume is high or low. Of course it's good to have whales and big investors -- that's important -- but more important, especially at this early stage, is having true fans. Those are the ones who'll be around in five or ten years and will tell the story. That doesn't mean the people who came during those hype months won't come back -- they're probably investing elsewhere for now, but fx(hash) will be on their radar once volume climbs again.

Will: I remember in January, when we started noticing the slowdown, some of the bigger users in the Discord who also played a lot on ETH were saying everyone's just paying attention to ETH PFP projects right now, that's where the money is. They were thinking about it purely from an ROI standpoint: let us go make our money on ETH, then we'll come back and invest with passion on fx(hash). If you're a large enough wallet, whether you mint a project or buy on the secondary at 2x, 3x, 5x over mint, it probably doesn't matter much on a cost basis when you're talking Tezos prices versus ETH. So I think there's something to that. But I know you started talking about your approach to collecting, and looking at your newsletter and the data you put out every week, I actually don't know what you like to collect that much. What type of art do you like to collect? Do you do any flipping at all? That's something we talk about on the show -- we flip sometimes to sustain our wallets when we have to. What's your approach?

Kaloh: I don't think I collect anything specifically. Over the past two or three months I've been collecting mostly generative art on fx(hash), but I also collect from time to time on other Tezos platforms, and I'm active on Ethereum too. I do flip, but not on a daily basis. I'm not really selling much, to be honest -- I think I've sold five or six things total since I joined, out of NFTs worth over a hundred tez. Ethereum is more where I flip, but that takes a lot of time to do short-term. I did pay attention to that -- what to buy today, what to flip, checking all the floors -- during my first three or four months in the space, but I didn't enjoy it. You could make money doing that, but it wasn't very rewarding, so I switched to a more sustainable, long-term strategy.

I collect what I like in terms of art, but I pay a lot of attention to the artist -- their background, history, how they manage their portfolio, their style, their socials. I'm trying to invest in artists who will be doing this over the next five to ten years, who aren't just here for the hype. Those are the ones I collect. I also pay attention to how something was created -- is it unique, something I haven't seen before? I see a lot of abstract landscape pieces lately -- mountains, a lot of mountains.

Trinity: Seascapes, trees.

Fidenza — Tyler Hobbs

Kaloh: Right. At the beginning that was unique -- when Zancan created his piece, the garden, monoliths, that was amazing, still very unique. Now I'm trying to find things that are still unique, and I look at how the code was made -- I don't read the code, but I try to get a feel for how complex it was to create that piece. Mostly I'm collecting for the long term. I've sold two or three things on fx(hash), but listing and checking floors takes a lot of time. Anybody can do it, and you can earn some income that way, but it's not rewarding for me. I'm trying to collect things for the long term -- some I might flip eventually, some I'll never sell. Probably 15% of my collection I'll never sell. The rest, if the price is right, maybe -- but I don't think we're there yet; I expect it to keep growing. I really enjoy what I'm doing and what the artists are doing, and I believe that if fx(hash) is still around in five or ten years and keeps growing at this pace, the collections from the first five or six months will be very valuable.

Trinity: That's something we're all looking forward to -- it's just hard to hold that long-term view when we're still so young and new to it. When it comes to the stable, down market we've been experiencing over the last month or so, has that impacted the way or the volume with which you collect?

Kaloh: I would say a little bit, but also because I'm not flipping. If I'm not flipping, it's hard to continue buying art. If I had more time to flip some things, clean my portfolio, and generate more income, I could sustain collecting more. But I'd rather use that time writing or reading what's going on. Part of it is the volume — volume went down, so I haven't flipped things I otherwise might have. But I still check the drops daily and try to mint things as they come up. It's very hard to mint, as you know, so sometimes if I miss a mint I'll jump in a few days later.

I was collecting a lot in December. I also sold some things on Ethereum and moved part of that into Tezos, which is something I'd wanted to do for a while. When you think about it, you can easily flip things on Ethereum for 1 ETH and up, and when you move that to Tezos, that's a lot — you can buy plenty of things. Once that move ran its course, I settled into a more selective strategy.

Will: Trinity and I were both there during the honeymoon phase in December, when it seemed like you literally could not miss on a mint — everything you minted was immediately worth 10x. That was really the heyday.

Trinity: It was so much fun.

Fidenza — Tyler Hobbs

Will: It was a lot of fun, and stressful, because you didn't want to miss anything, but it was quite a ride and got us addicted enough to make this show. You mentioned it can be hard to compete for mints now. I don't disagree, and a lot of that is driven by people who are really logged on and want to flip, behaving within normal human limits, but also by people running bots, multiple wallets, and scripts. Do you have a view on what that's doing to the platform? Is it a long-term problem? I'm sure it exists on Ethereum too, but I haven't traded enough there to know how much of an impact it has on those economies.

Kaloh: In my opinion, there's nothing wrong with flipping. It actually brings some advantages — exposure to artists, liquidity, and more royalties to fx(hash) and to artists. I have nothing against flippers, but I do think bots are a problem. Flippers keep the flow, the liquidity, the volume, going. Bots are different because they can create a kind of monopoly over things, and they're very hard to track. I believe the fx(hash) team has mentioned they're analyzing this — checking the blockchain — and they probably already have a big list of wallets using bots. There should be a way to block them, and they're already working on the whitelist system.

Bots also hurt artists because their pieces end up distributed among people who aren't collecting because they like the work — they're just in it for financial gain. They can drive the price up and down, which affects an artist's collections if bots are manipulating the floor. That's not good for an artist's long-term image. Flippers, on the other hand, are more okay, because they bring hype. It's like a concert: if tickets for a big band sell out quickly, that's because the band is in demand. As long as the way people acquire the tickets is fair, that's a good sign — it brings attention to the artist.

I think the bot situation will be solved with whitelists. Artists can create their own restrictions on who mints, build their communities, and be more selective — maybe 50-60% of pieces go to a whitelist and the rest to public sale, which is closer to how it works on Ethereum. Whitelists bring their own problems, though — they can become boring, and spending a lot of time trying to get on one isn't really a solution either. For that to happen you need huge demand in the first place. I think whitelists work fine as an early, short-term solution, but the problem becomes so many people wanting in that it creates a new bottleneck. Still, I'm not against flippers — I think they bring some good things too.

Will: We flip too, so we're not against it either — we try to flip ethically. It's such a strange thing with the bots, because the primary tool artists have used to combat it is pricing — trying to price the work at the level flippers might flip it at. So if they were going to put it at 10, maybe they price it at 25 or 30 instead. We've seen mixed results: sometimes you get these nice slow mints where only real collectors get in, happening over hours instead of minutes, and then you get a sustained floor that holds or climbs. But sometimes an artist tries that and gets completely botted and flipped on anyway, after two or three or four drops. It creates a really schizophrenic ecosystem for artists, where all they want is to get paid what they think the work is worth and get it into collectors' hands. It seems like all these factors work against that, when the whole idea of the blockchain is supposed to make this frictionless — and instead you get all these market-based conflicts that are genuinely hard to resolve.

Kaloh: Exactly. There's also the question of how often an artist should release collections. I don't think it's sustainable to release every two or three days — better to work on longer-term projects and release every month or two. That way there's always an expectation that people will be looking for your mint. But it's an open platform, so people can do different things — maybe you're experimenting, maybe it's a hobby, maybe you have the time now and won't later.

Fidenza — Tyler Hobbs

I feel like big artists will always mint out if they've built the right image. Marcelo Soria-Rodriguez, for example — with Contrapuntos and Entretiempos — built huge hype on fx(hash) and moved on to Art Blocks with his curated series. Even with all that hype, he only released two collections on fx(hash). I think things would have gone very differently if he'd released 10 or 15 collections in that time. It's about how artists manage their drops and build expectation around their work.

Trinity: It's an interesting thing to think about, because we've seen a lot of artists drop every few days — sometimes multiple times in the same day — which clearly isn't sustainable. But it's also really hard to always play by the market's rules when those rules are constantly changing, evolving faster than you can respond to or think through. Every week is different, every day is different — sometimes it even comes down to which time zones are active right now. It's a huge amount of work to keep up with.

Will: I'm curious — I tried to get you to name names earlier when I asked who you collect — but who do you think is doing it right? I have a few names in mind, but it's your interview, so I want to hear yours first. Who's hitting every mark: communicating well on social media, dropping quality work at the right frequency, pricing it right, all of it? Who are some of your favorites on fx(hash)?

Kaloh: If you think about success rate, Mark Knol on fx(hash) has done a lot of things right, and it's working out very well for him. He has a solid community, a real brand with Smolskull, and he's released many collections — not just two or three, probably over ten — while experimenting with different things along the way. I can't fully explain what it is, but people like his style, and he was early on the platform, having been on Tezos even before fx(hash).

Smolskull — markknol

I also think Yazid is doing great work. He's released a lot too — not a lot, but probably around ten collections — and they're consistently high quality. Beyond that it's hard to single people out, because if you look at the top 25 Tezos collections by market cap, many are worth over 10,000 tez, and they're all doing well. But Yazid and Mark Knol are good examples, even if it's hard to pin down exactly what they're doing right. What about you two — who's on your list?

Will: I'd say "vibes" is probably the word you're looking for — that's what we say in the US, that someone's got good vibes. I don't always know why we like them.

Trinity: Jazzy.

Will: Yeah, there's something jazzy about them. One I'd throw out is Rudxane — I think he's doing something right, not just with frequency (he's on a pace of about once a month now), but with the intention behind each release. Since doing the Dutch auction and moving away from just low-price drops, he's really established himself, and the work is diverse. He's also such a cornerstone of the community in the Discord. So he's one I'd nominate.

Kaloh: Definitely, and you can see the progress in his work — it's evolved a lot over the last three or four months. I really like that.

Trinity: For me, one artist who's done so well despite not releasing much is Erik Swahn — Disegnatori, Farbteiler, and Retrogrades. Just three projects, and nothing new this year at all, yet they all maintain healthy floors. Disegnatori had a big sweep earlier this week — the floor doubled through the efforts of one person. That's a project being held up by its collectors more than anything.

Farbteiler — Erik Swahn

Kaloh: Totally agree. I wonder if he'll release something soon.

Trinity: Fingers crossed. Erik, if you're out there, let us know.

Will: We've talked a little about allowlisting and what's coming post-beta. Have you caught up on the new dynamics with the DAO system and the fx(hash) token?

Kaloh: I was actually thinking about that today. I'm looking forward to the curated spaces -- I think that's going to be amazing. It'll drive traffic to collections that are really good but forgotten, or that didn't get the right attention when they dropped. I wish there were a way to connect it to my newsletter, maybe in the future, so you could build these curated spaces outside of fx(hash) to drive traffic in. That would be a great tool for attracting newer users who have never been there.

But the token and the DAO -- those are very important for keeping the community strong. And for investors, it's another way to invest, not necessarily in the art or in supporting an artist directly. If you're an investor who isn't necessarily into generative art, you can just buy a bunch of tokens -- a more straightforward way of investing in the platform. I think that'll be attractive to a lot of people.

I was hearing Ciphrd on a Twitter Space -- it's amazing what they're releasing. I hope they can stick to their timeline. It's very optimistic, but they've been delivering time after time, so I'm sure they have the right people for it. If they can stick to it, in a couple of months this becomes a very solid platform all around -- top five in the whole NFT ecosystem, compared to any other chain.

Farbteiler — Erik Swahn

Trinity: That's high praise. I don't have as much experience with other NFT platforms, but from everything I've experienced on fx(hash) and Tezos, it is, in my opinion, de facto the best -- usability, community, the way it's structured. It's well suited to the excitement, the hype, and to enabling people to keep driving the market.

That said, a lot of this -- the fx(hash) token, the DAO -- is coming with the full launch, which is allegedly next month or so. People have been saying the slowness of the market right now could partly be due to everyone waiting for beta to end. What do you think happens as we transition out of beta into the full release?

Kaloh: The key thing is that all existing collections will remain on the old contract -- there'll be a difference between new collections and beta collections. Honestly, I don't have a strategy of holding out for the full launch to collect; I'm not waiting for that. What I think could happen is that tokens minted during the beta period end up with special value, simply because they were minted during a period that can never happen again. That's the only effect I can really see. Maybe other people are waiting to collect until after the new contract launches, but I haven't thought much about it.

Will: I think it's more the artists who are waiting to release, because they're worried that once we switch to the new contract, the old one will be deactivated. So an unminted project would essentially get burned by the move. Or if they have interrelated projects -- a multi-part series -- they don't want some parts stuck on the old contract, separated from the rest on the new one. We've seen artists popping in to say, "Don't worry, I'm releasing soon, just waiting for the new contract," which is supposed to arrive mid-March -- maybe a week or two after this episode comes out.

Kaloh: But will you still be able to trade the old tokens? I think from a viewing perspective they'll probably be separated somehow -- maybe an icon showing it's from the beta period, the old contract.

Trinity: I'm not sure why it needs to work that way, unless it's just a way of marking status -- "this is an OG project." I think the bigger concern is that you won't be able to mint any unminted beta projects anymore. Whatever's left unminted gets burned, and that set remains fixed as is. If anything, that'll help -- it'll naturally drive up the prices of projects that haven't sold out, since it makes them a smaller set.

Farbteiler — Erik Swahn

Will: There's also a lot of new features coming with the new contract -- multiple artists or wallets listed on a single project, so collaborative contracts, or built-in Dutch auctions so you don't have to manually manage the pricing. So there are quality-of-life reasons too: maybe I want to do a Dutch auction, but I don't want to babysit my drop for two hours adjusting the price.

Kaloh: We're getting close now -- what, two or three weeks away? If I had a new collection ready in a week or two, I'd probably wait for the new contract to launch. But if someone had a collection ready last week, during February, I think they'd still release it. I'm not sure, though -- maybe that's a good question for more active artists. I could run a Twitter poll on that.

Trinity: Well, technically you are an artist.

Will: And your Twitter following is way bigger than ours, so you should definitely run that poll and get some real data. It's interesting that you buy into the narrative that beta projects -- which will be labeled genesis tokens -- could have higher value. Right now a lot of the collector community is focused on the first 20 projects on the platform: the Logos, RGBs, Weave, all the way to number 20, Chromatic Dazzle by W. Blythe. Do you think the further back in history we go, the more asymmetry we'll see -- some projects sufficiently early to be grails, some grails purely on status and quality, like Zancan or Waiting in Afton or Loom -- and then everything else just becomes "cool that it's a beta piece, nice piece of history," while only 10 or 20 projects actually matter?

Loom — Anna Lucia

Kaloh: Tough question. I think it was Gary Vee -- the influencer, very vocal about NFTs -- who said probably 5% of NFTs will have value in the future, but only 1% will be really valuable. He also says that's probably very optimistic. I think that applies to fx(hash) and to NFTs generally, somewhere around those two numbers. We have, what, 40,000 or 50,000 collections at this point? It's impossible for anywhere near half of that to retain value -- there's just too much supply. I'd say maybe 0.5% of fx(hash) will have value in the future.

Will: We just crossed the 10,000-project mark last week. So 0.5 to 1% would be 50 to 100 projects -- not too far off that 10-to-20 mark, within an order of magnitude.

Trinity: I don't know if you follow TENDER at all, as a form of curation?

Kaloh: I've seen it.

Trinity: Those numbers roughly line up -- there are about 150, maybe 200 projects that have actually been curated. That's a bit larger than 1%, but roughly in line with what will actually retain value down the line.

Kaloh: And as there's more supply, there will be more valuable collections in absolute terms -- that's just how it works -- but it gets harder for the percentage to hold. We need more collectors, more users, for that. Still, 1% or 5% of this is a lot. As a collector, maybe your goal is to try to find the projects that will land in that 1%. Look at a piece or a collection and ask yourself: is this going to be in the top 1% of fx(hash) ten years from now?

Loom — Anna Lucia

Will: I wish I'd studied art in college so I'd have some real basis for making that assessment. That's one of the challenges we often run into on the show -- there are things that appeal to us, and there are things we know influencers say are good, and I think a large portion of the community is genuinely at a loss for how to appraise art in that sense. Anything that's actually valuable in 10, 20, 50 years is probably also going to be judged by the standards of the larger art community -- unless this space completely cleaves off and crypto becomes its own outsider community making its own rules.

Trinity: It's interesting to think about, because obviously artists are a huge part of our community on fx(hash). But outside of that group -- the people who are pure collectors, not designated artists -- how many of them actually have an art background outside of NFTs? Are we getting that kind of qualitative analysis from anywhere besides the more established members of the community who also carry the "artist" tag?

Will: Sometimes the most established artists are the ones who create the most friction. I won't name names, but there are generative artists with a lot of credentials whose work doesn't get minted or trade at the level of, say, a Tree of the Week or a Mountain of the Week -- even though they're far more likely to stand the test of time over 20 or 30 years. It's bizarre that the community effectively says, "You didn't make me a mountain, so I'm not collecting you this week."

Kaloh: On the point about needing an art degree to critique these projects -- generative art has existed since computers could be coded, but combining it with NFTs feels like a genuinely new start. We really need critics and art historians to write these storylines and explain what has value and what doesn't. It's a new field, and I don't know yet whether the people who fill that role will be collectors or artists themselves. I'm trying to find good sources on this, because I want to get more educated -- not just on the financial side, but on the art side. It's not easy to find those resources; there are plenty of good books out there, but not on what's happening now with NFTs, blockchain, Art Blocks, and fx(hash). It's a completely new field, and we need more people thinking about it, critiquing it, curating it. I think it'll come naturally -- I just hope it happens fast.

Will: I know you're embarking on this adventure in March of writing about an artist a day. I don't know if you're going to be reaching out to them for interviews or if it'll just be you sitting with their work and writing about them, but maybe you'll start to form a greater thesis around these thirty-odd artists you're going to be writing about. I know you've listened to the show, so you know I do this thing called being the time cop — we're over an hour, so let's wrap up. Talk a little about this upcoming project and where people can find you if they aren't already subscribed to your newsletter. I think it'll be a great way for people to get acquainted with your writing.

Kaloh: I'm running this challenge — thirty NFT artists for thirty days. I'll be writing an article each day, nothing too long. I want them to be short reads you can take five minutes to look at in the morning and discover new artists. It'll be a mix of interview and me talking a bit about their art, and I'm planning to ask them questions like: what do you consider to be good generative art, and where should other artists and collectors look for resources to get more educated in this field?

Loom — Anna Lucia

I'm looking forward to it — trying to showcase artists who maybe aren't getting noticed yet, and learning from them and their process along the way. Hopefully people will enjoy it. It'll be on my newsletter, kaloh.xyz.

Will: We'll link to that in the show notes along with your Twitter. Kaloh, thank you so much for coming on. I hope you enjoyed it.

Trinity: I enjoyed it.

Kaloh: It was very nice to talk — video calls, talking fx(hash), it's a very podcast experience. I'm mostly talking about this stuff on Twitter or in the Discord, so this was different, and very enjoyable. Thank you for doing it.

Will: It's great to have you on to talk about the market, something we all love. Follow Kaloh, check the show notes, and that's it for this one. Thank you everyone, we'll talk to you soon.

Trinity: All right, thanks, Will.

Loom — Anna Lucia

Change log

  • Initial transcript — auto-transcribed (AssemblyAI) and readability-edited.