fotowerks Loc: San Diego, CA

What are your thoughts on this critic's opinion of the most expensive photograph ever sold?
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2014/dec/10/most-expensive-photograph-ever-hackneyed-tasteless?CMP=ema_565

James R. Kyle Loc: Saint Louis, Missouri (A Suburb of Ferguson)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hey! You and I posted the Same Pete Lik story... I say Congratulations to Pete. And It IS a very fine photograph.

Ruthiel Loc: Las Vegas

The critic is a snob

James R. Kyle Loc: Saint Louis, Missouri (A Suburb of Ferguson)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I wrote this on another page posting of the UHH... Here is again as it seems to fit here.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"Well.... I'll Tell Ya......

There are people "out there" who have a higher education and sometimes fall into the "cracks" of the reality of society where their chosen field of study was really not what they could do. So .... With that said.

There are Writers and "Would Be" writers... There are Photographers and "Would Be" photographers... There are Artists, and "Would Be" Artists (Musicians included). When the "Would Be" discover (without telling anyone - sometimes not even themselves) that they really have NO Talent for their chosen field of study, they must try other things... One is to Bullshit an editor (with his "sheet of paper" he acquired from the college of his choice) that he (she) is an ART CRITIC, and or "expert" in the given field.
These unfortunate people can NOT create anything but something that we toilet flush on a daily basis. They do succeed on making life of the true creative person miserable. And really have absolutely NOTHING to give to the betterment of the worlds cultural feelings.

So.....

To make only themselves feel important = They create very long expiations of what we all can see as simple.

The simple is to "Cut The Bullshit!".

fotowerks Loc: San Diego, CA

I looked the author up on the Wiki and I can't see where he studied art or art history, only that he had an interest in art. He has a right to his opinion but in my opinion, it is not informed so is of little value. I think the Guardian keeps him on staff because he is inflammatory in his style and thus generates page clicks and multiple comments. In closing; there are art critics and would be art critics. This guy qualifies as neither.

James R. Kyle Loc: Saint Louis, Missouri (A Suburb of Ferguson)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well Put - Good Sir.

:-)

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

I understand where this guy is coming from, but I don't entirely agree with him. Yes 6.5M is a lot to pay for the photograph, but that is the buyers choice, he/she may see more in the photograph than we see and 6.5M may be a drop in the bucket for them. Personally I would not buy it, however to demean B&W photography as a thing of the past and not applicable in today's photography is stupid. If photography is pure technical then we should all be producing the same IQ of a subject, and we are not and that is where I believe photography is just as much an art as a technology.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

He is correct in that Lik's image is a cliche, and personally not to my liking (but maybe to yours). Is it worth the money? Must be to someone, but I personally don't like his over manipulated images. But each to his own! It isn't my money.

His general comments are photography as art confuse the mechanics of photography and the art of seeing/visualizing. He is criticizing the mechanics like we might criticize the selection of oil paint vs. water color for a painting.

My $0.02

amyinsparta Loc: White county, TN

Everyone has an opinion. The critic has his, we have ours, and the person who bought the painting has his. So be it. Who cares what the person paid for it. Who cares how much PP the photographer did. What counts is that the person who bought it obviously likes it and the photographer is rich now. And the world did not end.

frozenhermitphoto

The critic has a legitimate point in that pointing a camera at something beautiful is not art, but getting the rest right is. Timing, lighting, mood,anything else that plays into setting up a good photograph is similar to mixing paints and applying to canvas. It takes skill and practice to do it right. A simple snapshot from a cell phone (with a little luck) may win a pulitzer prize sooner than someone's tenth attempt at a still life with oils will hang in the Louve, but when all is said and done it is all a matter of perspective.

Conversely, the critic is a pompous ass and obviously wants to generate buzz around his page. Stating that photography is not art is like spitting in the face of so many who have worked hard to make it an art form.

Not all photography is art; not all paintings are art; not all music is art; not all sculpture is art; his review is not art. Would I pay 6.5 million for that photo? Not even if I had billions. Would I hang it on my wall for a few hundred bucks? Without hesitation.

bonjac Loc: Santa Ynez, CA 93460

PIFFLE!!!

MtnMan Loc: ID

While I don't think much of such reviews by critics I agree that there are much more attractive photos of the same subject by others and that the price is silly. I feel the same about most of Picasso's stuff.

Don Craig Loc: Saranac, NY

Pretty harsh, but I can see the critic's point. I also disagree with him. Is photography art? Yes in my opinion. I also think a fool pays that kind of money for a print. He could have fed the poor or built a hospital.
Photographers have a vision just like painters, sculptors and poets. The speed of the technique and equipment does not make it less so.
I've seen some great photography on this forum, equal to any of the great photographers of the past. Equipment and technique improve.
I've also seen some great photographers on this forum try to improve a fine photograph with "arty" techniques in post production. I wish they wouldn't do that. :) JMHO

dave.speeking Loc: Brooklyn OH

The photograph is interesting and kinda neat. Maybe even art.
But it does prove without a doubt some people have too much money.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

That guy nailed it.

If you click the link in the article you see tons of examples of the same shot only better.

Hahahah.