|
|
|
-
-
-
It's better than that Cindy Sherman malarki.
-
 Originally Posted by rphenning
why
.
Why Not ?
Ron
.
-
Reminds me a bit of color field paintings.
-
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
-
Why?: because there are people who are willing to pay crap tons of money on meta-stuff, not just how good the thing per se is.
Why not?: cuz there's crap tons of minimal landscape photos, just on Flickr alone, that's better than this mediocre piece.
-
You actually pay for the idea i think.
When the photo is nice, that's a bonus.
-
Great sky(?) I have those problems too.
I guess it's a case of the one percent who have the money to spend on the one percent of artists who command this amount having the taste to determine the market.
The AGNSW had the enormous dime store print--a previous large money spinner record I believe-- on show a while ago, it was pretty boring up close. You would need a very large house to hang it, but I suppose the buyers own office blocks or galleries.
-
Because it's big and a CEO can hang it behind his Desk or the Lobby. Gursky's fame has in my opionion nothing to do with how good his photographs are (mostly boring) and everything to do with how big they are furthemore he is part of the Becher clicque which mostly consists of overated photographers with good connections to the art market.
Dominik
-
|
|
Adv Reply
