On Jan 21, 2012, at 3:44 AM, Bob W wrote: >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >> [email protected] > >> His paintings are a hell of a lot sharper than my photographs. >> >> ;-) >> >> I suppose that his technique (or at least the result) is interesting, >> but the subject matter is rather banal. It looks like that's the way he >> wants it, and he's entitled.to that. If some find that the technique or >> style overwhelms content to the point that the mundane has value then >> they're entitled to that, too. >> >> I actually like hyper-real painting but for me it works much better if >> the subject matter holds my interest. This gentleman's work (from what >> I've seen) doesn't. >> >> Cheers, >> frank > > from what I've seen the banality of the prima facie subject matter is > important, because the real subject matter is not the bottles, or the > newspapers or the sunset, but the act of looking. I find that quite > interesting. > > It reminds me quite a lot of the early novels by Nicholson Baker, which are > minute-scale examinations of banal events, such as a worker's lunchtime > spent in a chemist's shop. The world in a grain of sand, that kind of thing. > Minute examination of the familiar leads to new ways of looking. In these > pictures he also seems to have a thing about words, and fragments of word, > which adds a dimension. > > B > I agree. I find the work fascinating. His earlier work was traditional landscapes and the like. Those were realist as well, but I don't find them as compelling. > > -- > 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.
-- 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.
