Question - Is beauty really in the eye of the beholder or is bad just bad? Can a really bad quality picture also be looked as art? I proposed this question in "Birds in Flight" and the...

cdavis7820 Loc: Akron Ohio

Can a really bad quality picture also be looked as art? I proposed this question in "Birds in Flight" and the answer is overwhelmingly No for the pictures I used.

Now I'm trying to see if the perceptive is different based on group.

Is beauty really in the eye of the beholder or is bad just bad?

Thank You

(Download)

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

"Really bad" and "what is art?" will never have a consensus among groups as varied as this UHH membership. But yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder

Fred Harwood Loc: Sheffield, Mass.

Good luck!

mrpentaxk5ii

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but these are just bad.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

My approach is integrity. Was that your intent? If so, it's successful and art. If it's a blown attempt with some fidgeting of some plug-in sliders in an attempt to make something of nothing, it's crap.
--Bob

cdavis7820 wrote:

Can a really bad quality picture also be looked as art? I proposed this question in "Birds in Flight" and the answer is overwhelmingly No for the pictures I used.

Now I'm trying to see if the perceptive is different based on group.

Is beauty really in the eye of the beholder or is bad just bad?

Thank You

juanbalv Loc: Los Angeles / Hawthorne

Beauty is, indeed, in the eye of the beholder. It always depends on what you are trying to achieve. No one can say with any degree of certainty, what the artist intended on any given work. Personally I like the effect of your photographs. They have an ethereal feeling about them. I like that for what they evoke in me.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

When something is done deliberately to create a desired effect we refer to it as art and judge it on how effective or appropriate we consider the effect to be. On the other hand, trying to pass off a mistake as art is another matter. Some art came about because of a lucky accident, but beyond that, not all accidents are lucky in the sense of producing something that has intrinsic artistic worth. Altering reality usually has to be done in a considered and intentional way in order to produce something of artistic value.

In the case of your posted images, extreme softness IMO isn't effective or appropriate for seagulls. It doesn't bring out the essence of winged flight or highlight anything about the seagull's nature. If it did it would have some artistic merit.

juanbalv Loc: Los Angeles / Hawthorne

People pay good money for presets, and filters to be able to achieve those effects in their various photography software programs.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

cdavis7820 wrote:

Can a really bad quality picture also be looked as art? I proposed this question in "Birds in Flight" and the answer is overwhelmingly No for the pictures I used.

Now I'm trying to see if the perceptive is different based on group.

Is beauty really in the eye of the beholder or is bad just bad?

Thank You

Art can be either good or bad. It is still art.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Beauty is not what makes art.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

A good topic for "For your consideration section" not for photo analysis, sorry.

kpmac Loc: Ragley, La

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So is crap. Because someone calls something art does not make it art. Like anything else, a line must be drawn. I realise that line is somewhat arbitrary.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

kpmac wrote:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So is crap. Because someone calls something art does not make it art. Like anything else, a line must be drawn. I realise that line is somewhat arbitrary.

You might like this post then...

Designdweeb Loc: Metro NYC & East Stroudsburg, PA

Art’s a language with vocabulary, grammar, and content, history, and often with context, sometimes a body of related work. You can break the rules, to make a point, but make a point. Beautiful is a whole ‘nother topic. And there’s even more to it than that, but I’m no genius.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Designdweeb wrote:

Art’s a language with vocabulary, grammar, and content, history, and often with context, sometimes a body of related work. You can break the rules, to make a point, but make a point. Beautiful is a whole ‘nother topic. And there’s even more to it than that, but I’m no genius.

That is so true!

Everyone has different likes and dislikes, and beauty to one person is crappy to another.

Art is still art even if you or I do not like it at all! What we do or don't like or see as beautiful does not determine what is art!

Jerry G Loc: Waterford, Michigan and Florida

There is good and there is bad, there is also good art and there is bad art, so it could be art, just bad art.