Sometimes its surprising

[dots]

I liked Rhein II. 4.3 mill is a bit steep though Did anyone else here consider the date - 1999?. I thought about reunification..'demarcation' - the view from one bank to the other (only metaphorically - the course of the Rhine extending south rather than 'East'; but it's Die Quelle des Mutterlandes)

 

[unpopular]

Art is often overpriced, but the price people are willing to pay doesn't I validate the artwork.I don't understand why people insist that photography must always be so bold and dynamic. It's like there is no room of subtly. I think often when looking at images like this it goes against people's sensibilities about what photography should always be: something exciting in one way or another, even images that are peaceful and still have this intoxicating quality which in itself shows a certain boldness.

I feel kind of overwhelmed by all this extravagance to the point of nausea. Art doesn't need to be about glitter.

 

[dots]

Often it isn't people at this level..it's corporate and institutional procurement. Commodification. Investment. 20 mill for a van Gogh is crass on so many levels. Would have bought a lot of potatoes for the miners of the Borinage, non?

Art is often overpriced, but the price people are willing to pay doesn't I validate the artwork.I don't understand why people insist that photography must always be so bold and dynamic. It's like there is no room of subtly. I think often when looking at images like this it goes against people's sensibilities about what photography should always be: something exciting in one way or another, even images that are peaceful and still have this intoxicating quality which in itself shows a certain boldness.

I feel kind of overwhelmed by all this extravagance to the point of nausea. Art doesn't need to be about glitter.

 

[unpopular]

Has anyone even mentioned yet that this image is 7x12 feet? Yes. FEET. And that maybe, just maybe, something has been lost in translation as it was rescaled to about 2 by 4 INCHES?

Having read that, nobody here, unless they have seen the image in person can say anything about it. The experience would completely are utterly mis-translate between seeing it in person and seeing it in life.

IDK. If this were a Rothko would we be so shocked, awed and even horrified? No, in fact, it would might be a steal.

Photographers are their own worse enemy.

 

[bentcountershaft]

And I forgot. Go out to the galleries and museums someday, you might learn something more than by looking at art on your stupid computer.

I am ALWAYS, UTTERLY, AMaZED at how few people here actually visit galleries.

In person? No 3D imaging, no IMAX just pictures on a wall? I don't know, seems too easy, like a trap. Will there be pie?

If you go to the openings there may not be pie, but wine, and cheese, and other nibbles. The last gallery show I went to was a full on catered event. The food was amazing!

Free food? I'm ready for that. I don't know if the art world is ready for me just yet though. Oh well, they'll just have to suck it up.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

In person? No 3D imaging, no IMAX just pictures on a wall? I don't know, seems too easy, like a trap. Will there be pie?

If you go to the openings there may not be pie, but wine, and cheese, and other nibbles. The last gallery show I went to was a full on catered event. The food was amazing!

Free food? I'm ready for that. I don't know if the art world is ready for me just yet though. Oh well, they'll just have to suck it up.

The art world IS ready for you... so long as they can figure out a way of selling you

But openings are a great way to get free food. The last opening I went to in the US was in Athens, GA, a gallery that opens 2 days a week with an owner that barely knows what she's doing (her words) but felt she had to have the event catered instead of just offering wine and cheese like most. The art didn't do much for me but the food and booze was just great and, with a few friends, we stayed till the end. And because we were all staying in the building, we didn't care how drunk we got

Anyway, the art world is weird and unpredictable and I've sayed it here before. One movie I love on the subject is Pecker by John Waters. If you haven't seen it, rent it, watch it. It ends with the new boy wonder of photography, Pecker, being replaced by the almighty blind photographer :lmao:

If you like this movie be very careful what else you rent from this guy. John Waters, however much I love him, is not a family friendly movie kind of guy...

Now, to get back to this photo, I don't get it either, but 1/ I haven't seen it in real life; 2/ I know how much of a difference it can make to see a piece of art in real life; 3/ no matter what, I'm happy for the guy and for all photogs because this sale helps all photo artists.

 

[dots]

nobody here, unless they have seen the image in person can say anything about it.

Says who? I can imagine it "big". In a gallery. I like it. Stop asserting crap on behalf of others you don't know.

 

[bazooka]

What a freakin' noob, he put the horizon right in the middle.

 

[bentcountershaft]

If you go to the openings there may not be pie, but wine, and cheese, and other nibbles. The last gallery show I went to was a full on catered event. The food was amazing!

Free food? I'm ready for that. I don't know if the art world is ready for me just yet though. Oh well, they'll just have to suck it up.

The art world IS ready for you... so long as they can figure out a way of selling you

I bolded the important part. I like what I shoot, I'm gaining confidence in my abilities in the things I shoot but I can't imagine anyone paying for what I shoot. Not because of quality but subject matter.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

One movie I love on the subject is Pecker by John Waters. If you haven't seen it, rent it, watch it. It ends with the new boy wonder of photography, Pecker, being replaced by the almighty blind photographer :lmao:

Full of Grace! Full of Grace!

I love Pecker!

John Waters is awesome!

 

[c.cloudwalker]

One movie I love on the subject is Pecker by John Waters. If you haven't seen it, rent it, watch it. It ends with the new boy wonder of photography, Pecker, being replaced by the almighty blind photographer :lmao:

Full of Grace! Full of Grace!

I love Pecker!

John Waters is awesome!

And as awesome in person as his movies are. "This Filthy World" is an awesome monologue if you haven't seen it.

I got to meet the man through common friends when I first moved to the DC area and he is definitely my kind of insane person. Back then, before he became somewhat "Hollywood famous," he was very approachable. Few people really knew who he was outside of Baltimore

But the reason I'm telling you this is that there is another little lesson about (photography) and the arts here. Not for you really, Bitter, I think you already understand what I'm about to say. One needs to keep one's ears (and mind) open to the possibilities. When I first moved to that area I knew nothing of it but I soon found out it was very big in the theater so I started meeting people involved in that which led me to find out that DC is the second movie area in the US after Hollywood. Yeah, I know, hard to believe but it was back then. I have no idea if it still is.

Anyway, both the theater and the movie industry there were major possibilities for photo work. One just had to hold on tight and ride the waves.

I got to spent a lot of time on one of Waters' shoot and it helped me later when I went and shot some documentaries. I also worked (photo wise) with a bunch of theater people which led to work with music people... etc, etc.

 

[RobertDarasz]

First things first: They see me rolin'... they hatin'. So what - somebody had the money and bought it for more than 4 million, obviously for that particular person it was worth the money. I don't understand people getting upset because this photo was sold for such high price. First of all you didn't buy it, it's not your money, you don't have to pay for it. You should be happy you got the opportunity to see the thumbnail of this photograph.

Besides - it's Gursky we're talking about. And behind his success lies something some of us don't have: Consistancy in the kind of art he's doing, years of hard work and (let's face it) what matters most in this business - good reputation and a name. His pieces are very complex and highly detailed scrupulous montages, it takes skill and sophisticated taste to do something like that.

Oh, and PS. I don't see anyone bitching about paintings being sold for higher prizes than this photo.

 

[unpopular]

nobody here, unless they have seen the image in person can say anything about it.

Says who? I can imagine it "big". In a gallery. I like it. Stop asserting crap on behalf of others you don't know.

If you haven't seen it in person, then you have not experienced it. You've experienced your expectation of what the artwork should be, but not what it actually is.

So stop whining already. Seriously. It's pathetic.