NationStates Jolt Archive

I went to deviant art again and glanced on the side of the screen of the excellently drawn anime picture i was viewing, a daily deviation of photography, but not any photography, but ABSTRACT photography. People were sitting around commenting him on his AMAZING piece of art work for taking a picture of a street sign from below, so it looked like noting, just looking up a pole with the signs sticking out just as lines. I saw this before, soem sad picture of a chain fence, taken from below again. I should really do photography, take a photograph of nothing, but take it from below, gloss up the photo to make it look good, and BAM you get peopel falling over themselves to comment you on your magnificent work of art.

what a load of crap. i want to see real photography, hell, even a picture of a field with the grass blowing in the wind is far higher in my book than standing under something pointing up and shooting, why are peopel fawning over these ludicrous pieces of "art"? thats what i want to know

Because people think in ways you couldn't imagine

Because people think in ways you couldn't imagine
the people poking smot obviously

It’s definitely a seller’s market, I can tell you that much.

Well ... that's "art" for you. It's one of those entirely subjective things. In Houston we used to have these guys called "The Art Guys" and people would pay them huge money to stand on a corner in the Montrose in expensive suits and their feet in buckets.

Personally, I like Scott McCloud's definition of "art" as laid out in his book "Understanding Comics".

the abstract photographers aren't loons, they're brilliant. They know they can rope a whole bunch of dopes into purchasing their "artwork" and make much positive cash doing it. After all, all they need is a camera and some black and white film, go for a stroll, and boom, you've got a 24 pictures you can sell for $300 a pop at some big city art gallery.

I went to deviant art again and glanced on the side of the screen of the excellently drawn anime picture i was viewing, a daily deviation of photography, but not any photography, but ABSTRACT photography. People were sitting around commenting him on his AMAZING piece of art work for taking a picture of a street sign from below, so it looked like noting, just looking up a pole with the signs sticking out just as lines. I saw this before, soem sad picture of a chain fence, taken from below again. I should really do photography, take a photograph of nothing, but take it from below, gloss up the photo to make it look good, and BAM you get peopel falling over themselves to comment you on your magnificent work of art.

Could you provide a link? You know, just how we can see how "crappy" this photograph is? Why do you think that something you can see every day is "nothing" or "not art"?

Anyway, please visit my site there:

http://swimmingpool.deviantart.com/

:)

the abstract photographers aren't loons, they're brilliant. They know they can rope a whole bunch of dopes into purchasing their "artwork" and make much positive cash doing it. After all, all they need is a camera and some black and white film, go for a stroll, and boom, you've got a 24 pictures you can sell for $300 a pop at some big city art gallery.
The wonders of the free market!

I went to deviant art again and glanced on the side of the screen of the excellently drawn anime picture i was viewing, a daily deviation of photography, but not any photography, but ABSTRACT photography. People were sitting around commenting him on his AMAZING piece of art work for taking a picture of a street sign from below, so it looked like noting, just looking up a pole with the signs sticking out just as lines. I saw this before, soem sad picture of a chain fence, taken from below again. I should really do photography, take a photograph of nothing, but take it from below, gloss up the photo to make it look good, and BAM you get peopel falling over themselves to comment you on your magnificent work of art.

what a load of crap. i want to see real photography, hell, even a picture of a field with the grass blowing in the wind is far higher in my book than standing under something pointing up and shooting, why are peopel fawning over these ludicrous pieces of "art"? thats what i want to know

You seem to be doing well with abstract spelling, why not give abstract art a shot?

Actually, all art, including photography is abstract, in the sense that it is a representation of reality, not reality itself. Think of Rene Magritte's famous painting of a pipe titled Ceci n'est pas une pipe (this is not a pipe).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%E9_Magritte

The wonders of the free market!
Precisely why I believe in it. I'd bet if you were to take digital color images and blur them all, except for a little single, normal object slightly off to the left, you'd be able to sell it for a bundle.

The smart taking advantage of the dumb.

You seem to be doing well with abstract spelling, why not give abstract art a shot?

Actually, all art, including photography is abstract, in the sense that it is a representation of reality, not reality itself. Think of Rene Magritte's famous painting of a pipe titled Ceci n'est pas une pipe (this is not a pipe).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%E9_Magritte
1) hey go fuck yourself loser
2) you miss the point
3) a painting with a smart ass comment is not the same as photographing fromthing from below and declaring it a masterpiece

1) hey go fuck yourself loser
2) you miss the point
3) a painting with a smart ass comment is not the same as photographing fromthing from below and declaring it a masterpiece

Oh, my, an abstract sense of propriety and good manners as well. Are you sure you aren't secret fan of surrealism?

What's wrong with abstract art? Require too much imagination and thought from your conformist brain?

What's wrong with abstract art? Require too much imagination and thought from your conformist brain?
i dont see the art in taking picture of something from below (none of them are from any other angle but below) and calling it a masterpiece.

wow look itsfrom below

i can see the sky!


wow, its up isntead of forward



this is fucknig ludicrous. take some real fucking photos and stop wasting film

i dont see the art in taking picture of something from below (none of them are from any other angle but below) and calling it a masterpiece.

wow look itsfrom below

i can see the sky!

wow, its up isntead of forward

this is fucknig ludicrous. take some real fucking photos and stop wasting film

Whatever else the merits of this collection of photographs the artist certainly has succeeded in getting into your head with his or her work. If I see artwork I don't care for I just forget it, but obviously these pictures made an impression on you.

What's wrong with abstract art? Require too much imagination and thought from your conformist brain?

NOt liking abstract art doesnt make you conformist.

Whatever else the merits of this collection of photographs the artist certainly has succeeded in getting into your head with his or her work. If I see artwork I don't care for I just forget it, but obviously these pictures made an impression on you.
that they were a waste of the materials used to create them

that they were a waste of the materials used to create them

Yet you continue to give up your valuable time discussing them. Many artists would be pleased to know that someone was posting discussions about their work and that the work had such an obvious emotional impact.

Yet you continue to give up your valuable time discussing them.
i dont have valuable time, im forcing myself to post this isntead of going to bed just to see if some one i know will log into msn messenger

Even if that particular photograph was bad, that doesn't mean that all abstract photography is worthless...

NOt liking abstract art doesnt make you conformist.

I mean that you can't see beyond ordinary artistic conventions.

3) a painting with a smart ass comment is not the same as photographing fromthing from below and declaring it a masterpiece
Who declared it to be a masterpiece? Not the artist, that would be arrogance. Who? Yes, the other deviants. They have the right to a different opinion.

i dont see the art in taking picture of something from below (none of them are from any other angle but below) and calling it a masterpiece.

wow look itsfrom below

i can see the sky!


wow, its up isntead of forward


this is fucknig ludicrous. take some real fucking photos and stop wasting film
What is art then? Once again I remind you that the photographer did not delcare it to be a masterpiece.

I also think that they can waste as much film as they want as long as they are paying for it and Fuji/Kodak can keep making it.

that they were a waste of the materials used to create them
Anyone is free to "waste" (and that's really subjective) any materials they can pay for.

the people poking smot obviously


Hey, don't dis the smot pokers.

You're just one of those people who resents photography because you think it's cheating and taking away from art. What do you think of new age art? I went to an art museum and saw a red canvas with a vertical green line and that was it. IN A FREAKING ART MUSEUM. But then again, art isn't about "oh I could do that" it's about "someone did something no one has done before, and even if it's total crap, they get snaps for doing something creative."

You saw one picture you didn't like. Okay, so you didn't like it. Take a look at a few other abstract photographs and see what you think.

Adrian Rodriguez
http://www.arodphoto.com/Toilygraph1LR.html

Helyn Davenport
http://www.pixiport.com/gallery-A01.htm

Tatania Palnitska
http://www.abstractphotography.com/html/current.html

Barry Massoni
http://naturalabstraction.com/index.html

Also, calling someone narrowminded for not liking abstract art is narrowminded.

A person is entitled to whatever they like, but if someone likes abstract art purely for the fact that it's abstract and doesn't relate to them or move them at all, that's conformist, even if it is ABSTRACT art.

In truth, I'm not sure how photography is an artform.

In truth, I'm not sure how photography is an artform.

Then you don't know enough about the subject.

A lot of time goes into finding exactly the right composition, exposure, and other elements. And if you consider art the amount of time or work one spends on something, then how is Jackson Pollock art?

Art can be anything.

In truth, I'm not sure how photography is an artform.

Check out photographs by Margaret Bourke-White, Man Ray, Matthew Brady, Ansel Adams, Dorthea Lange, Robert Mapplethorpe, Dianne Arbus, and Annie Leibovitz for work by some of the more acclaimed photographers.

It is more than point and click.

In truth, I'm not sure how photography is an artform.
How do you define "Artform"?

I think the two previous posters pretty much summed it up.

bump

Check out photographs by Margaret Bourke-White, Man Ray, Matthew Brady, Ansel Adams, Dorthea Lange, Robert Mapplethorpe, Dianne Arbus, and Annie Leibovitz for work by some of the more acclaimed photographers.

It is more than point and click.

it takes a little bit of effort to appreciate photography. some people are too stupid for it. i want to see the picture of the sign in question, and that will probably give me a reason to acclaim it more than some manga piece of shit.

Well, if its art then its subject to a certain level of critisicm, educated or not. Id like to think I have the right palate to appreciate photography as art - but that doesnt mean I have to like it all, just appreciate it for what it is.

an argument defending painting from photography:
I have no fear of photography as long as it cannot be used in heaven and in hell. Edvard Munch

and one for photography:
A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you the less you know. Diane Arbus

;)

I went to deviant art again and glanced on the side of the screen of the excellently drawn anime picture i was viewing, a daily deviation of photography, but not any photography, but ABSTRACT photography. People were sitting around commenting him on his AMAZING piece of art work for taking a picture of a street sign from below, so it looked like noting, just looking up a pole with the signs sticking out just as lines. I saw this before, soem sad picture of a chain fence, taken from below again. I should really do photography, take a photograph of nothing, but take it from below, gloss up the photo to make it look good, and BAM you get peopel falling over themselves to comment you on your magnificent work of art.

what a load of crap. i want to see real photography, hell, even a picture of a field with the grass blowing in the wind is far higher in my book than standing under something pointing up and shooting, why are peopel fawning over these ludicrous pieces of "art"? thats what i want to know

For the most part I agree with you. While colors and patterns can be somewhat esthetically pleasing, in general I find "Abstract Art" to be "art" created by those who lack the talent to create something of organized, thoughtful beauty.

This perspective has gotten me into trouble with my wife on more than one occasion as she prefers to create "abstract" art. I have learn to appreciate some of it, but still don't find it any where as compelling as other art forms.

For the most part I agree with you. While colors and patterns can be somewhat esthetically pleasing, in general I find "Abstract Art" to be "art" created by those who lack the talent to create something of organized, thoughtful beauty.

This perspective has gotten me into trouble with my wife on more than one occasion as she prefers to create "abstract" art. I have learn to appreciate some of it, but still don't find it any where as compelling as other art forms.
So you adhere to the Aristotlean idea that pleasure in art comes from how well is mirrors reality?

Why do you think that abstract art cannot be something of organized, thoughtful beauty?

In truth, I'm not sure how photography is an artform.

What's wrong with photography? Require too much imagination and thought from your conformist brain?