| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/12/2011 05:22:13 PM · #26 |
Art museums are full of people saying"my kid could have painted that picasso"
No. but your kids probably could have taken that picture, and it wouldn't have broken 200 on one of ourDPC free studies.
From the real critics here, I plead ignorance. is this photographer picasso? Or is it post paint bs and the emperor has some new clothes? What say you? |
|
|
|
11/12/2011 05:33:08 PM · #27 |
I cannot speak for all of the people that wandered past this incredibly talented young man, but I can assure you that in all probability most were just too busy and in a hurry to even begin to pay any form of attention to the music he was playing... funny thing about trying to make ends meet is that once truly does not have time to smell the roses... let alone listen to music.
One could also argue, that the average working stiff would know very little about this young man or his claim to fame as most do not belong to the economic strata that permits this type of fiscal latitude.
Nice story, but sadly it does miss some of the more subtle realities of every day life for the average person.
Ray
Message edited by author 2011-11-12 17:34:15. |
|
|
|
11/12/2011 06:10:22 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Nice story, but sadly it does miss some of the more subtle realities of every day life for the average person. |
I'm not so sure it does, Ray. I got a different feeling from the article, that they definitely understand what you're talking about. The issue was more, "What have we lost, or are we missing, in modern life that this is the case?" I didn't get any sense that they were putting down the working stiffs that flooded past in any snide or judgmental way.
Indeed, they were at great lengths to point out that "art" is very much a matter of context. Did you see the part where the Director of the National Gallery opined that he could hang his Ellsworth Kelly on the restaurant where students sell their work off the walls, and NOT get $150.00 for it?
R.
|
|
|
|
11/12/2011 06:40:15 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by keenon:
I'm doing something wrong...
Frankly, if an image of mine with the same quality sold for that much money, I'd use all of it to fund philanthropic causes, and in that way assuage my shame. |
So if you thought your image was a higher quality, then you'd feel OK about it?
In other words, you think it's justifiable that SOME photos might sell for 4 million plus, but not THIS one? Don't you realize how odd that sounds? Simply because, when it comes to "art", ALL value is perceived, not intrinsic; a piece is worth whatever someone will pay for it.
R. |
I think it would be awesome if you reread my post and tried to misunderstand it even more. |
|
|
|
11/12/2011 07:01:53 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by keenon:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by keenon:
I'm doing something wrong...
Frankly, if an image of mine with the same quality sold for that much money, I'd use all of it to fund philanthropic causes, and in that way assuage my shame. |
So if you thought your image was a higher quality, then you'd feel OK about it?
In other words, you think it's justifiable that SOME photos might sell for 4 million plus, but not THIS one? Don't you realize how odd that sounds? Simply because, when it comes to "art", ALL value is perceived, not intrinsic; a piece is worth whatever someone will pay for it.
R. |
I think it would be awesome if you reread my post and tried to misunderstand it even more. |
What part did I misunderstand? YOU are the one that qualified it with "of the same quality": if you'd left that clause off, I wouldn't have found anything to comment on. But, intentionally or not, you left the implication that if the work was "better" in some way it would then potentially be worth the price.
And that was all I was commenting to. It's not even personal, not in the slightest. It's even a DEFENSIBLE position, I have no problem with it: "Better art is worth more money, and I don't think this art is good enough to be worth that." I just used that as a springboard to discuss, generally, "better in whose eyes?"
Sorry if you felt misunderstood or attacked in some way.
R.
|
|
|
|
11/12/2011 07:04:26 PM · #31 |
Also, for the record, let's be aware these are AUCTION prices and the money's NOT going to the photographer, but to whoever's reselling the work, and of course to the auction house. I have no idea what the photographer was originally paid for the work, though I suppose this steadily-escalating auction prices are driving his gallery prices through the roof...
R.
|
|
|
|
11/12/2011 07:21:16 PM · #32 |
I have not seen Mr. Gursky's "Rhein 2" in person, however I would love to .
Mr Gurskys work is worth $4.3Mil to someone, and I don't understand why is that a surprise to some. Anyone thinking they can do better is welcome to try and beat his achievement. |
|
|
|
11/12/2011 07:26:57 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
Just found this video about him. |
this video seems to imply he takes large format film pics and then "DIGITALLY" engineers "flatness" into them.
@Basta- what do you mean "beat him at his achievement?" |
|
|
|
11/12/2011 07:40:04 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
Just found this video about him. |
this video seems to imply he takes large format film pics and then "DIGITALLY" engineers "flatness" into them.
@Basta- what do you mean "beat him at his achievement?" |
Looking at some off the posts above , people don't think Mr Gursky's work is all that special. Universal measure of how good an image is appears to be $.
Anyone thinking They have a better Photo? |
|
|
|
11/12/2011 07:47:39 PM · #35 |
| I think it's all just a statement on the value of our currency. |
|
|
|
11/12/2011 08:15:45 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Basta:
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
Just found this video about him. |
this video seems to imply he takes large format film pics and then "DIGITALLY" engineers "flatness" into them.
@Basta- what do you mean "beat him at his achievement?" |
Looking at some off the posts above , people don't think Mr Gursky's work is all that special. Universal measure of how good an image is appears to be $.
Anyone thinking They have a better Photo? |
I just wanted to make sure we were talking about money, and not some level of actually universally objectively beating him at "art." I am losing the nuances in the forums lately. sorry. |
|
|
|
11/12/2011 08:27:43 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by Basta:
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
Just found this video about him. |
this video seems to imply he takes large format film pics and then "DIGITALLY" engineers "flatness" into them.
@Basta- what do you mean "beat him at his achievement?" |
Looking at some off the posts above , people don't think Mr Gursky's work is all that special. Universal measure of how good an image is appears to be $.
Anyone thinking They have a better Photo? |
I just wanted to make sure we were talking about money, and not some level of actually universally objectively beating him at "art." I am losing the nuances in the forums lately. sorry. |
Sadly, without money as a "level" we wouldn't even talk about him.
Personally, I think we should not make any comments about his work without seeing it in person. As  BrennanOB said "To get the feel of Gursky right it would be nice if, for just this challenge, we could increase the maximum pixel size from 800 to 8,000,000,000,000,000 pixels on the long side." |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/05/2025 06:01:17 PM EDT.
