Fakes in art can be an interesting topic for critical studies discussion.
Consider how painting pigments and methods have changed since the Renaissance and why faking these works is now so difficult. Will modern acrylic pigments and materials be as difficult to reproduce convincingly for forgers in the future? Does a fake of an old master that goes undetected have the same artistic merit as a work by the original artist? If it is then detected as a fake does it then have less merit? It would certainly be worth far less than before even though it had deceived so many - is this logical? Is there a connection between the monetary value of a work, and aesthetic merit? Which works of art would be easiest to fake, given that modern technology makes it so difficult to copy old masters without detection? Carl Andre's pile of bricks perhaps? Or some minimal art? How difficult would it be to fake a Jackson Pollock?