Well, many jokes are tasteless, vulgar, insulting and clearly reprehensible. When it comes to AA, it's obviously deplorable, like so many things in contemporary culture, and impossible to justify. But it's arrived, along with much else.
-
Welcome to Photrio!Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.Click here to sign up
Danziger Gallery Exhibits "AI-generated color version" of Ansel Adams' "Moonrise, Hernadez, New Mexico" at AIPAD
-
- Thread starter logan2z
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale 6 antique French pneumatic shutters _ Guerry
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale Voigtländer Nokton Classic 35mm/1.4 with Leica M-mount
- Started by Klaus Mähring
-
For Sale Voigtländer Bessa R2 Special Edition Olive Green
- Started by Klaus Mähring
-
For Sale FS: Horseman Cable Release
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
Sold SOLD!
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
Reprehensible? Deplorable? Who wuz murdered?? A BW photo was colorized. That's it. I think it's an interesting study. Others may not. It's art.
Danziger has a card displayed stating what he did and crediting the original image as Adams, so he's not trying to take credit for the source material. Is it about the money? What if he had permission from the trust and paid a royalty like when a musician samples someone else's music? Would that be acceptable? I believe Danziger produced a conceptual art piece, but he should have discussed it with the trust and probably paid a royalty.
Anyone remember the situation over the Mural Project? There was a book in the 90s(?) and a question about the copyright of the images as they were made under the employ of the government. Wasn't there an argument that Moonrise fell under that project?
If it’s a question of money, fine, but we need to be careful about putting limits on personal expression. In the 1990s, the National Endowment for the Arts stopped funding individual artists altogether after right‑wing lawmakers complained that taxpayer money was supporting “unacceptable” art. Rather than defend artistic freedom, Congress shut down the entire program. It’s a reminder that once you let politics decide what counts as legitimate expression, the art — and the artists — lose.
Anyone remember the situation over the Mural Project? There was a book in the 90s(?) and a question about the copyright of the images as they were made under the employ of the government. Wasn't there an argument that Moonrise fell under that project?
If it’s a question of money, fine, but we need to be careful about putting limits on personal expression. In the 1990s, the National Endowment for the Arts stopped funding individual artists altogether after right‑wing lawmakers complained that taxpayer money was supporting “unacceptable” art. Rather than defend artistic freedom, Congress shut down the entire program. It’s a reminder that once you let politics decide what counts as legitimate expression, the art — and the artists — lose.
Last edited:
I'm selling the BW version of my study for $500 and the colorized study version for $750. Please contact me if you're interested. Framing not included. Add $200 for signed copy. 
Then piece was not produced by Danziger, though. What they put on the wall was a colourized print of a piece produced by Ansel Adams. There's nothing conceptual here. It isn't making any kind of statement. Take Alan's image above. If they'd downloaded a colour version of Alan's photo and printed it b&w, saying it was AI "monochromed", they wouldn't get a dime for it - 'cause no one knows who Alan is. If there was a statement to be made, it would have just as readily been made in that instance.
Says the Académie des Beaux‑Arts?
Alan Edward Klein did it to mock, so there's meaning beyond the images.
How long does that meaning last, exactly? Does it become significant on its own, outside of it's particular reference?
Stating something doesn't make it true.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 15,396
- Format
- 8x10 Format
I'll frame it for you Alan; for $500 plus shipping. You'll get it by the time your copyright runs out.
Is that meaning a form of humor, even though it's not very funny?
Will you call it ‘Moonrise over Hernandez’? Or would that be a heresy too? … like naming a cigar Romeo y Julieta?I'm selling the BW version of my study for $500 and the colorized study version for $750. Please contact me if you're interested. Framing not included. Add $200 for signed copy.
View attachment 426283View attachment 426282
What would you charge if I did a dyptich of them?
They couldn't do that because my photos are copyright protected. Moonrise isn't.
I didn't do it to mock. That would be insulting. I did do it to make a few points, to add to the conversation.
Sure they could. Then you'd have to enforce your copyright by issuing a takedown notice or suing them.
That's something the Trust can't do.
It appears the last of the oxygen is being sucked out of the room so I’ll be moving along.
It’ll be interesting to track the developments of Danziger and the artists they represent over the following months, so I’ll keep an eye on The Art Newspaper and similar outlets. I’m surprised that some of the more popular mainstream news outlets like the New York Times, who write frequently about AI and it’s impact on society and the arts, haven’t picked up the story. Perhaps they will in time.
It’ll be interesting to track the developments of Danziger and the artists they represent over the following months, so I’ll keep an eye on The Art Newspaper and similar outlets. I’m surprised that some of the more popular mainstream news outlets like the New York Times, who write frequently about AI and it’s impact on society and the arts, haven’t picked up the story. Perhaps they will in time.
Apparantly, the Danziger photos were printed by master printer Esteban Mauchi. Does anyone know this guy?
Yup. That wouldn't be free, either. No guarantee you'd get your legal expenses covered. Then, what happens if they do it in a foreign country?
Anyway, that wasn't my point. Let's say I use a photo by some unknowable photographer (instead of a photographer who is not well-known). It wouldn't sell or get any attention. The photo they printed only gets attention because it's already famous.
Oh, the irony of this!
And replaced with CO
I'm selling the BW version of my study for $500 and the colorized study version for $750. Please contact me if you're interested. Framing not included. Add $200 for signed copy.
View attachment 426283View attachment 426282
What about you sell an Ansel Adams? Just download from the internet and print?
and/or anthropogenic CH4
Drew already bid $500 for the job. Seems like a reasonable price but his schedule commitment seems a bit sketchy.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |