Might as well argue about whether something is *good* art or not.
I like the Peter Lik photo in question. I can see that it would make a
really beautiful big print. But it's not unique, and it's not
outstanding above all others. There are many images quite as good in the
genera.
Just go to flickr & search "slot canyons".
IF I were obscenely wealthy - even "using $1000 bills for toilet paper"
wealthy - I wouldn't pay that much for it.
On 12/17/2014 7:25 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
I missed this post the other day. Sean O'Hagan of The Guardian writes
a perfect rejoinder to that other -- Jonathan Jones also of The
Guardian -- idiot's argument that "photography can never be art and
Peter Lik proves it."
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/dec/11/photography-is-art-sean-ohagan-jonathan-jones
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Bruce Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
... and sells a photo for a historical 6.5 million dollars as a result.
https://fstoppers.com/landscapes/what-65-million-dollar-photograph-looks-49113
--
-bmw
--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.
--
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.
