This isn't addressed to Michael - but I think it launches a good point for discussion. I was really surprised by the level of discussion in response to these pieces. A bit shocked maybe. I'm surprised a photographer would respond that way - there's no differentiation between subject and object. This would suggest that technique is utterly rescindent to subject. And that a beautiful photograph can only be beautiful because of it's subject. But anyway - it raises the question "what is it that we WOULD hang on our wall?" - only works that we felt were either complimentary, attractive in some way, or that didn't challenge us? I think it would be an interesting conversation.
Originally Posted by blansky