Forget a thousand words. This picture's worth $2.9 million (photo was of a Long Island pond)

Associated Press ^ | February 14, 2006

[KeepUSfree]

I agree 99%. Most films are not art.

However, your analogy is WAY flawed. See, most films tell a story - which could be debated for it's "artistic value".

[weegee]

So if a painting doesn't tell a "story" it's not art?

[new cruelty]

LOL. I had a similar experience when I went to see Solaris (don't ask me why I wasted money and time on going to see this movie, I have no good reason). I got more of a rush from watching the glimmer of the red light over the exit door.

[weegee]

I walk out on movies now. Even if I am only 15 minutes from the end. I really DON'T have to know how some wastes of time end.

I've made the mistake of seeing two Lars von Trier movies (both of which I walked out on). Saw Ang Lee's The Hulk and Crouching Tiger, never again.

I CAN watch a movie for the wrong reasons though.

Another thing that happens when I get bored watching a movie is I'll start looking at the book titles (often spines) on bookshelves in the background.

[OB1kNOb]

Only $14.95 plus $6.95 s/h while quantities last! Signed and numbered only $10 more! Hurry! This fire-loot-pillage-rape-rob-blowup blowout sale won't last long (or so we've been threatened). Sure to be a collectors item. Order now. - OB1

[John O]

what about my far bettter photos of bikini babes shot at Daytona Beach? You should see the lights and shadows in those photos.

You'll have to post a few of them so we can judge the quality of your work before the bidding could start.

[new cruelty]

most films tell a story - which could be debated for it's "artistic value".

Most pictures tell a story, too. As in, a picture is worth a thousand words or in the photo shown in this thread, $2.9 million. You and I may not know the story or like the story, but it's there somewhere and someone knows about it and is willing to debate its artistic value. I think art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beer-holder. So if some schmo wants to pay $2.9 million to enrich his/her life, then that only adds to the legend of this photo. Does that make it art? Beats the crap outta me, but there is a story to it. : )

[John O]

ping to post 32

[macamadamia]

Big friggin' deal. They are pictures. Nothing more , nothing less.

Why do you assume the buyer has blinders on? Because he paid an amount most of us don't have? I can think of plenty of photographs I'd like to buy...but it doesn't follow that I can't see the thing for what it is, simply because I pay a higher price than the next guy. On the other hand, a cherished family photograph IS CERTAINLY MORE than just a photograph, isn't it?


They have no "real" value because you can print as many as you want - and they are indistinguishable from the original.

I have no idea what "real value" means.....but copies made today CERTAINLY ARE DISTINGUISHABLE from the original unless you know nothing about photography, particularly the more antiquated processing and printing methods.


Idiot art people.

For all we know, the buyer might not care whether the photograph is art or not. Why is he an idiot? Because he paid a lot for something the next person couldn't care less about............welcome to a free market. This kind of buying and selling happens in other fields, not just the art world.


photography is not "art."

Out of curiosity, what IS your definition of art? Contrary to opinion, the handwringing about what is and is not art, often has no bearing on those who buy it or make it. Moreover, the photography market would continue to exist and thrive even if that nebulous word or concept vanished into thin air.

[new cruelty]

...I'll start looking at the book titles (often spines) on bookshelves in the background.

I do much of the same. I'll look at the camera angle, dissect the script and the cadence in the dialog, ponder the sound effects and sound track. And ultimately, like you, if I can't take no-mo, I'll walk out. I've only done that on a few films- those that come to mind are Prince: Under the Cherry Moon, Bats, and The Contender (the one about the politician, not the one about the boxer).

[Sensei Ern]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[new cruelty]

I'll sell it to ya- cheap!

[John O]

she's cute but shes deformed

[new cruelty]

fire-loot-pillage-rape-rob-blowup blowout sale

Boy, the sales are getting harder to resist these days.

[Sensei Ern]

And this one is titled, "Don't shoot officer!"

[Sensei Ern]

Do you happen to know which carrier that is? I met Jim Green yesterday. He flew Hellcats off of the Wasp and the original Coral Reef...the pocket carrier(forgot what their official name is), not the big carrier Coral Reef.

[Sensei Ern]

Nah, I'll just loot it.

[John O]

photography is not "art."

Out of curiosity, what IS your definition of art?

I'll play. "Art" is determined only by the buyer. For me, photography is not art. Motion pictures are not art. Some paintings are, some sculpture is.

Like the poster up thread who saw the paint can and brush and thought it was a display (and these days something like that could be) the best example of 'modern' art I ever saw happened by accident. A pepsi can had fallen into the waterfall between the east and west buildings of the national gallery in DC and ended up standing up against the wall on one of the falls. It looked cool. In fact it looked better than any of the 'modern' works in the gallery.

Now some people may pay millions for photos or some paintings. I look at the item they are buying and think they are insane. But it's their money.

[KeepUSfree]

No, a painting is "created" from nothing. A photo is merely a mechanical, physical process using light and film to create an image that already exists.

[Oliver Optic]

That's a photo of a pond? It looks like Hillary Clinton's dental X-ray.

That is one of the funniest things I've ever read on FR.

You have a twisted mind. But you know, you're right ... it does.