|
|
|
-
I don't want to open a can of worms again, but the picture is not a photograph. It is a composite made of a photograph. Gursky himself does not claim his pictures being photographs. Gursky is not making pictures, nice to look at, but ideas and concepts you can look at. Some may consider them nice to look at or at least interesting.These ideas and concepts are considered being art. You will have to know and appreciate this to appreciate his pictures. As far as I know, he isn't even making all of the pictures entirely himself.
It's not Gursky making the money but the owner of the picture/gallery who is making the money (though it may not have been cheap in the first place I suppose. He addressing a certain audience by making his pictures large).
Ulrich
Last edited by Ulrich Drolshagen; 11-10-2011 at 04:52 AM. Click to view previous post history.
-
 Originally Posted by Ulrich Drolshagen
I don't want to open a can of worms again, but the picture is not a photograph. It is a composite made of a photograph. Gursky himself does not claim his pictures being photographs. Gursky is not making pictures, nice to look at, but ideas and concepts you can look at. ...
Ulrich
I don't want to open a can of worms, either, but what you just described is something *I* would still consider a photograph (or part of what constitutes the modern photographic process), and, in light of other photographs (or *works of art* *ideas and concepts* etc., if you prefer) that are out there, this particular one is still quite boring.
Also, I don't think anyone is particularly accusatory of Gursky per se. After all, he's not the one paying or even suggesting how much his photographs should be traded at.
The only good point I've seen so far is regarding the size of his prints. Maybe we should all start printing huge 
-
Originally Posted by rawhead
The only good point I've seen so far is regarding the size of his prints.
Maybe we should all start printing huge
.
Maybe It's Time For Me To Make Another Offer On This Device ...
http://www.ebay.com/itm/110625524775...84.m1438.l2649
Ron
.
-
It's another example of "the emperors new clothes" school of photography" 
-
Art without commerce is a hobby. Any stronger proof needed?
-
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
-
Originally Posted by CGW
Art without commerce is a hobby. Any stronger proof needed?
On the contrary, commerce without art is a hobby in this case.
-
-
Ach, I liked matters better when his 99 ct store picture was the record holder. That had an appreciable irony whereas a very big picture of a very teutonic river for a very big price hasn't.
-
Originally Posted by benjiboy
On the contrary, commerce without art is a hobby in this case.
You so don't get it, do you? Just more of the usual, endless, uncomprehending sour grapes whenever anything unconventional rolls by here.
-
I like it...a lot.
I saw this Rhine photo in a Gursky exhibition here at the "Istanbul Modern" museum. It was the only work that resonated with me.
|
|
Adv Reply
