A valuable critique?
Take a look at this photo and the critiques provided (ignore the venting between participants).
I've read many critiques online but this is the one I would always back to as a reference when arguing with someone over the importance of execution and craftsmanship. So tell me.. Who do you agree with?? I'm personally with Marcus on this one (harsh! but agreeable)
I wish I received these kind of critiques.
Money is not the problem. The problem is, I don't have any.
I've seen many pictures involving shrink-wrap type stuff and many of those have been much more interesting in terms of pose, lighting, setting and execution. That one does nothing for me and doesn't even have "uncomfortable" or "shock" value. From my own point of view it was a waste of materials and time as even if it had been executed perfectly it would still be boring.
I agree with Marcus, but I found this quote to be very funny:
"your only mission is to publicly masturbate your ego, well stop ejaculating all over my photographs!"
According to George, one could simply expose their paper so that it's just a sheet of black paper, and if they are happy with it, then it's art. I'm sorry, but I don't agree with that. So even though Marcus was harsh with his critique, I think he was right and George was sort of a "sore loser". By the way, this is just my opinion.
Wow I thought Marcus was publicly working his ego in a sort of self gratifying manner and the art was not working at all. The secondary point of Marcus' post was managed better by others.
If he would change the name to "Contraception", it would be a powerful statement of our cultural values. Sterile. Antiseptic. Make that Antiseptic Love(r). The shabby technique only adds value to its ugliness. This work should be heralded as a true work of art by the art world.
Oh, forgive me, I wax sarcastic. Or do I?
Last edited by 25asa; 12-06-2004 at 11:22 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I lean towards Marcus though I don't necessarily agree with how he presents his opinion.
My own opinion is that if the photograph had been intended to break the rules, the photographer should have known the rules well enough to know how to break them and still produce and intersting photo. I don't think that's the case with this photo.
For myself, I want honest critiques. What I won't accept in a critique is being told I should have chosen a different subject. Tell me how to do it better, but don't tell me not to do it at all.
I normally don't get involved in these types of discussion, but i was bored and thought i would check it out. Read all the comments and then decided to check out this fellows other work.
Did anyone else do so? After looking at the others posted i would have to agree with anyte regarding this fellows understanding of when and how to break the rules.
I have beginners with better work and certainly more interesting, if you throw out the
"shock" stuff. WHich leads me to back up Marcus with regarding to the Mapplethorpe work . just my .002 cents worth.
I'll admit that after reading in the description that the poor model was not covered with Saran Wrap, but wrapped in 2 inch wide clear adhesive tape I am more viscerally affected by the piece. The sense of anticipation and empathy at the model trying to remove all that tape after the picture was taken evokes sympathy and pity and poses the question "What the heck was that guy thinking when he agreed to let a photographer of arguably questionable skill and talent wrap him naked in sticky tape instead of non-adhesive, painlessly removable plastic wrap?"
If it made me think that much, it's gotta be art
That is called grain. It is supposed to be there.
As has been said already, art is supposed to have a concept behind it, an idea communicated though whatever medium, however simple. To create (being generous)something 'random' and then allow the viewer to make stuff up is simply admitting to being a pretentious fraud. Worse still, the 'artist' claims that this is challenging stuff because of the difficult access to the culture he is part of. If this is normal life to him, in what way was it challenging and enterprising? Most people would not be able to take images of ferrets giving birth (random thought). Does that mean that a ferret (polecats in the US???) keeper has been clever and artistic (badly) recording this event and passing it off as conceptual art? No, I think not. I would bet that there are many advertising and documentary photographers/journalists that have routinely dealt with the same issues (naked men, piercings, tatoos, self harm...you name it) rather better, let alone fine art photographers. He has certainly not illuminated a dark, murky world for us for the first time or in a new way. I think the debate is interesting, but in a nutshell this chaps approach to 'art' represents all that I have contempt for in the world of art. Even he does not know the point. To finish in a familiar manner....the only way it enriches the viewer is through pity for him and uncontrollable laughter...whoooah, without realising it..... art it is
I actually walked past a 6 feet tall poster today of a female with her hands around her head and completely wrapped in shrink-wrap type shell. It was to highlight domestic abuse and the lighting was spot on for my liking.
I looked at it for ages partly as a beautiful piece of art and partly allowing the concept of the picture and the reason behind it to connect in my brain. I came away feeling that one was a beautiful and disturbing work of art as it touched me, which for me is another important attribute of art. Sadly I can't find a version of it online at any of the domestic abuse sites