On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 11:10 AM, P N Stenquist <[email protected]> wrote:
> Most art is artificial. It's a representation. The world would be a pretty > drab place without it. > Paul Paul, I was talking about a particular genre of photographic portraiture, not art in general. BTW, ~all~ art is real, insofar as it's "really art". Not all art is a representation of anything (hence, abstract art). And among the representative arts, some artists strive to be more accurate or reflective of reality (whatever the hell that is) than others. What I like spans the gamut from complete abstract to hyper-real, but within that huge range there are genres and individual pieces that I like or dislike more than others. My reaction to Bill's rendering has nothing to do with whether I prefer art to be representative of reality or not. It has to do with my preferences wrt photographic portraits. It's a personal thing. I'm not asking anyone to agree with me. I know that there are those that disagree with me, and that's fine. But since my viewpoint is subjective, neither can anyone tell me that I'm wrong in my feelings. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
