> Does art cease being art because the artist created plates and created 100 prints before it wears out? Is that less art than a painting?

Of course not. It's just as much an art.

But those prints shouldn't be priced with the same premium that a single original often has.

It should be priced at the maximum value someone is willing to pay for it… and naturally in market economy it often will. The Artist needs to also make a living and not all of their artwork will sell at earth shattering prices. It seems just as arbitrary to limit the price of the item to a fraction of the value of a single item. I do wish more art was auctioned rather than come with a fixed price tag to make the market more fluid and less egotistical.

The art world seems to think so.