Art, like any other object for sale, is all about marketing.
Upvote
0
Policar said:I would recognize that it's an excellent photograph, but nothing more.
sagittariansrock said:Policar said:I would recognize that it's an excellent photograph, but nothing more.
Ok, let's forego your comments on how he is an 'unmistakeable genius', I wouldn't get it if you knocked me on my head with that genius!
(Mind you, the term is technically wrong, since so many of us right here have cheerfully made the 'mistake' of not understanding that 'genius')
Let me ask a simpler question:
Why is this an excellent photograph?- please explain it as you see it. Please avoid esoteric terms like cold, banal, etc. or terms like composition and texture without explaining why that is good. I am not asking about the 'concept' in it. Just why this is an excellent photograph.
Thanks.
Jeffbridge said:What makes this photograph worth $4,338,500 (other than the obvious fact someone was prepared to pay that amount for it)?
mackguyver said:Then I realized (yet again) that I am a photographer, NOT an artist. I shoot for the love of photography, and consider 90% or more of the "art" photography I've seen to be cliched crap. B&W, torn edges, crap out of focus, cheesy InstaPhotoShop filters - yep, that's "art" in today's world. Quality photos of unique subjects in beautiful light - nobody wants that.
***Stepping down from the bitter soap box ***
distant.star said:.
Well, there are different ways of getting to $4 mil.
My plan is to sell 4 million pictures for a dollar each.
Chuck Alaimo said:I think there is the whole, art is in the eye of the beholder argument - but - there is also the good old, name = prestige. Chances are all of us here Could take that shot, but, would any of us even think of consider showing it that large? image: --- that's pretty huge! 73 x 143 in ---6 feet by close to 12 feet...huge. Gursky can and did do that because he has both skill and the name and of course the lab and his own giant printer too.
It's sad because I see so many artists making such amazing things...selling them for $100 a pop, then see this---yeah gursky's is huge but...it's 4 million not because of the content ---
Face the facts - it's 4 million because it's a gursky. Same shot printed to same size by unknown fill in the blank artist - well, your talking a few grand at most because - unkonw fill in the blank artist isn't known, has no acclaim. Where did this thing sell, christies, and yeah, they cater to the rich, the rich want bragging rights, they want that piece on the wall that will be the talk of the next cocktail party (mind you, the cost of the cocktail party for this rich guy alone is probably more than the unkown artist would would get for his print) ---ohhh it's a such and such...
Sorry if that ruffles feathers, but it's true...
Jeffbridge said:What makes this photograph worth $4,338,500 (other than the obvious fact someone was prepared to pay that amount for it)?
sagittariansrock said:Policar said:I would recognize that it's an excellent photograph, but nothing more.
Ok, let's forego your comments on how he is an 'unmistakeable genius', I wouldn't get it if you knocked me on my head with that genius!
(Mind you, the term is technically wrong, since so many of us right here have cheerfully made the 'mistake' of not understanding that 'genius')
Let me ask a simpler question:
Why is this an excellent photograph?- please explain it as you see it. Please avoid esoteric terms like cold, banal, etc. or terms like composition and texture without explaining why that is good. I am not asking about the 'concept' in it. Just why this is an excellent photograph.
Thanks.
Policar said:I could ask you to describe why Beethoven's 9th is great without using words like "melodious" "beautiful" or discussing texture and composition... Give it a go. You can instantly recognize that it's great, so describe it (don't do any research first, either!) and convince me. Let's say I prefer Wrecking Ball by Miley Cyrus because it has more emotion and lyrics. Convince me otherwise.