$3,890,500!!!

Thomas Bertilsson · May 16, 2011

Early Riser said:
Thomas my own frame of reference is vastly more extensive than most photographers so it's not like it's a limiting factor for me. And understand this perspective, I spent 25 years producing work that was intended to be viewed by millions of people, that I did this on a daily basis, and as a result I had to have an understanding of how people view a photograph and how or what that photograph needs to communicate.

Do I understand that others may enjoy her work? Of course. People relate to work for a variety of reasons, I relate to Penn and Bernhard because they turn simple things into something special. They often see something that is not clearly visible and make you feel something strongly, and they do so with ONLY the photograph itself, no lengthy explanations.

I think for some photographers with limited skills but high personal hopes for their success, what they like about her work is that it's not beyond their own skill level and that gives them hope that someday they too can achieve this level of fame and fortune. For them it's an inspiration. I think for other photographers it's easier to jump on the band wagon of work that has gotten official approval rather than be the one who says that the Emperor has no clothes. I think for some people with limited knowledge or a smaller frame of reference they are more easily impressed with a photograph that a professional would find lacking. I've seen people love an image because they like that shade of red, or they used to own a hat like that, or they just like any picture of NY or San Francisco because they love that place. There are many reasons why an image appeals to someone. And some of them are very shallow at best. And without all the hype and lengthy explanations Sherman's work has very little on the paper.

And why am I not just "cutting some slack"? Because I have devoted my entire life to photography, 7 days a week for 35 years, and I hate seeing the standards and quality go down. I want to see work that blows me away, that inspires me to work harder, I hate seeing mediocrity being encouraged for political or fashion or commercial reasons. The same way a history teacher would react to the recent survey that reported that 77% of Oklahoma high school students could not name the first US President, that is how I view the trend in photography and why I feel strongly about what is going on.

Everybody else's opinion count as much as yours. You have to respect how people come into their opinions, for it took them their entire life to get there. Their entire life. Regardless of how narrow or big it is (or shallow, in your opinion, of course) you simply cannot dismiss it.

I am confident I can learn a lot from you. You seem like you think your arguments through, and that you have a clear view of things. And you do state arguments that are strongly convincing. But that doesn't mean I have to agree with you, same as you don't have to agree with me.

Regardless of the arguments you make about school, education, etc, which are difficult to argue with, I come back to Sherman's picture.
Sherman's picture may or may not be seen as a serious work of art, but you are not the arbiter who gets to decide whether it is or not. That's for each and every one of us to decide for ourselves. If you cannot allow people that autonomy, then you are limiting their freedom of choice.

removed account4 · May 16, 2011

SNIP

Early Riser said:
And also understand that what drives the art world is selling to collectors. And for collectors the attraction is not always about the image, it's content or quality, for many it's about the status of owning something expensive, rare and famous.

isn't that they way it has always been ?
i don't really think things have changed much over the years.
kings, queens and nobility have always 1-up'ed eachother,
why would the wealthy, or large corporations be any different now
than they have been ?

[video=youtube;rkB9OT2XVvA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkB9OT2XVvA[/video]

if the photographs fade shift and ultimately delete themselves after a number of years
couldn't the people that make and sell things that "vanish" like that be held accountable
for selling something that doesn't last ...if buyers had an expectation that their investment would
have worth in 10years time ?
i know some portrait photographers were / are held accountable when prints shift / fade over a
number of months when the manufacturer say " would last xxyears " and it isn't true ...
i make things that vanish, and are ephemeral, but i don't expect anyone would buy them
because ... they won't exist in a few years ( or months ) time ...

Early Riser · May 16, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
Everybody else's opinion count as much as yours. You have to respect how people come into their opinions, for it took them their entire life to get there. Their entire life. Regardless of how narrow or big it is (or shallow, in your opinion, of course) you simply cannot dismiss it.

Actually Thomas if it's an opinion that's based on little experience or expertise relating to the subject being discussed I can readily dismiss it. I can state that I have played baseball as a kid and have watched it on tv or at stadiums for almost 50 years so clearly I have some experience with baseball. But when it comes to my opinion about the finer points of playing baseball as compared to Derek Jeter's opinion, is my opinion just as valid? I don't think so. So why is some part time amateur photographer's opinion just as valid as a long time professional's?

vpwphoto · May 16, 2011

Early Riser said:
I have some experience with baseball. But when it comes to my opinion about the finer points of playing baseball as compared to Derek Jeter's opinion, is my opinion just as valid? I don't think so.

Agree very much...

Dinesh · May 16, 2011

Early Riser said:
...... But when it comes to my opinion about the finer points of playing baseball as compared to Derek Jeter's opinion, is my opinion just as valid? I don't think so.

Probably not the best example considering what happened this past weekend with Posada.

ROL · May 16, 2011

Vaughn said:
While it would have been great for us photographers if the buyer had bought 3,890 prints from various artists for $1000 each instead, this is still amazing. It would be nice if the artist got 10% of these sales as a general rule.

FYI, the state of California requires the original artist receive a percentage commission on the resale of artworks and that is why art is almost never resold within the state of California.

SuzanneR · May 16, 2011

Early Riser said:
Suzanne, a few points, first the longevity of C-Prints, here is a quote from a paper put out by Wilhelm research;

"The Museum of Modern Art New York Statement to Photographers Who Work in Color.--- It is now well known that with a few exceptions color print materials show a noticeable fading or color shift within as little as ten to twenty years when stored under normal room temperature and humidity conditions, even in the dark. Most such works in the Museums Collection, prints up to 20 x 24, are now stored at about 30°F [1.1°C] and 35% relative humidity. These conditions will substantially increase the life of the prints. However, these same photographs also fade or change color when, on exhibition, they are exposed to light."

So Sherman's print will last a bit longer if you never display it And store it below freezing in a dark and dry room. So you saw a print of it in 1981 have you seen one in person since? Have you ever seen a copy kept frozen and in the dark side by side with one that has been displayed? I doubt it. This problem was serious enough for MOMA to take serious steps to protect the images, freezing and darkness. But I guess the person who just paid $3.8 million for it won't mind building a walk in freezer to view the print, of course they'll need to view it in the dark lest it fade.

And because I don't like her work, and because I noted that she benefitted from the peak of the feminist movement and that it was popular with female curators then I'm a misogynist? Or is it because I said her work, a huge series of self portraits, was narcissistic? I'm sorry but in my view anyone who makes themselves the sole subject of their photography for 30 years, who has that fascination with their own image, is narcissistic. Look up the meaning. I also think that Richard Prince is a plagiarist, so I guess that means I must hate men too?

I think that currently there are many female photographers VASTLY superior to Sherman, on every level. And those photographers will never get the attention or success they deserve when the art world is hyping crap from 30 years ago because the artist has a name. And what has she done in 30 years? The same photograph, over and over again.

I'll grant you C-prints aren't the most archival of mediums, but they do last longer than milk, then again, it and the milk may last an eternity in the walk in freezer!

As to your question, I think you sound a little miffed that feminist curators gave attention to women photographers, and the notion that Cindy Sherman is a narcissist seems, well a little off. I have no idea what she really looks like, she takes great pains to use herself as a model, changing outfits, hair, make-up, sets, props, and looking at the many roles and faces women have worked at all through this past century. And her film stills series, is certainly different than her color work. And they don't look the same over and over, not to my eye at least.

And I just don't see that her pictures require that much of an explanation... they are cinematic, and leave lots of room for interpretation, asking a lot of questions. I find the work quite smart really, and I have to say, I didn't like it much when I first saw it.

We can agree about Richard Prince, he is a plagiarist, has been plagiarizing for thirty years, badly, I might add, and I, for one, am pleased he no longer holds the record for "highest price paid" for a photography. Sherman's work is far more interesting than Prince's work.

patrickjames · May 16, 2011

Ain't no substitute for experience, except more experience.

Not picking on you Thomas because I like you, but I don't see a reason why everything needs to be democratized. When I look back at the years of photography that I have put in, I am amazed at how much more I know now than back when I thought I knew it all. Everything is different. The pisser about knowledge though is that you often don't know what you are missing. There are always more windows to open. I am curious to see what things will be like in another 15 years when I have been doing this as long as Brian. Who knows.

Thomas Bertilsson · May 16, 2011

Early Riser said:
So why is some part time amateur photographer's opinion just as valid as a long time professional's?

Because we are all humans, and we all deserve respect. To dismiss someone's opinion, just because you think you know better is disrespectful and elitist.

If you think, for a minute, that you are better than others and don't show respect for their opinions, how do you expect that in return?

holmburgers · May 16, 2011

Greg Davis said:
So you think we need to post our resumés and have a dick measuring contest before we can state an opinion to argue against yours?

+log3!

Thomas B should be applauded for his democracy, and not riding the all too slippery and inviting slide of closing yourself off from everyone else's opinions. He strikes me as someone who doesn't worry if his opinion is the "right one", or accepted by others.

Early Riser, I put very little faith in experience when we're talking about art where one man's trash is another man's Duchamp. Chances are, if we were the same age and had equal experience, we still might not agree, and then by what do we judge our opinions?

I just think that it comes down to two types of people (broadly speaking); are you the kind of guy who can watch Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey and the 10 minute long "intergalactic journey" or do you fast forward it and ask "where's the plot"?

vpwphoto · May 16, 2011

Thomas and Patrick...
... I wouldn't want a democratized doctor operating on me.
... I often tell folks the first time I read Ansel Adams -Negative, Print, Camera series I didn't know enough to understand it.
... experience and then more.
... I don't like to come off as an academic elitist, but I also don't like having a college education and master's pursuit dismissed.
... I also let people know when I humbled and in awe of their point of view.
... Back to Cindy's work... I have never been a big fan, although her photographic narratives are compelling as a window on the world and female condition as one artist sees it. I see Sherman as and artist not a photographer, just as she would see me more as a photographic practitioner and not so much an artist.

removed account4 · May 16, 2011

taste and experience go hand in hand
like taste and wealth go hand in hand
( they don't )

Early Riser · May 16, 2011

SuzanneR said:
I'll grant you C-prints aren't the most archival of mediums, but they do last longer than milk, then again, it and the milk may last an eternity in the walk in freezer!

As to your question, I think you sound a little miffed that feminist curators gave attention to women photographers, and the notion that Cindy Sherman is a narcissist seems, well a little off. I have no idea what she really looks like, she takes great pains to use herself as a model, changing outfits, hair, make-up, sets, props, and looking at the many roles and faces women have worked at all through this past century. And her film stills series, is certainly different than her color work. And they don't look the same over and over, not to my eye at least.

And I just don't see that her pictures require that much of an explanation... they are cinematic, and leave lots of room for interpretation, asking a lot of questions. I find the work quite smart really, and I have to say, I didn't like it much when I first saw it.

We can agree about Richard Prince, he is a plagiarist, has been plagiarizing for thirty years, badly, I might add, and I, for one, am pleased he no longer holds the record for "highest price paid" for a photography. Sherman's work is far more interesting than Prince's work.

You say I sound miffed? Maybe you're right, I'm miffed that for political reasons a mediocre female photographer who was aided by the wave of feminism has been able to eclipse other women photographers who possessed vastly more talent AND had to face the strong head winds against women photographers decades before the feminist movement. As an example look at the work of Ruth Bernhard, who did exceptional work in both still life and figurative. Her creativity, mastery and versatility is in a different league than Sherman. And she had to produce that work in a completely male dominated profession 40 years before Sherman, and it was women like Bernhard that paved the way for Sherman. So why Sherman and not Bernhard? Really who is the more significant photographer when it comes down to the body of work and not the hype?

Photographing almost nothing else but yourself for 30 years doesn't scream narcissism to you???????? And quite literally 30 years of taking the same photograph, so big deal if the hair and makeup changes, it's basically the same image over and over again.

pbromaghin · May 16, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
Because we are all humans, and we all deserve respect. To dismiss someone's opinion, just because you think you know better is disrespectful and elitist.

If you think, for a minute, that you are better than others and don't show respect for their opinions, how do you expect that in return?

I have to agree with you Tom, with respect to the presumption of superiority amongst the mutual admiration society that may surround an artist or may have extensive knowledge of a small subset of a subject matter. I see this all the time in my profession (IT) and my main passion (martial arts).

But it is also the case that knowledge, experience and dick size do -and should- matter when expressing or receiving an opinion. The few months of watching these discussions have shown whose opinions are more valuable than other's. Mainly these are the people with the resumes. They do not always correspond to those with whom one agrees or disagrees.

vpwphoto · May 16, 2011

Greg Davis said:
That's probably closest since she doesn't usually operate the camera herself, but has someone do it for her.

Ya! I win at internet today!

Seriously though this discussion is better than the discussions I had about her in college back in 1988!

People buy what they want... In this case the work is likely bought as a hedge or on speculation.

zumbido · May 16, 2011

A person with years of success in commercial photography, has earned the right to say that what they did worked for them in the realm of commercial photography. That's about it. It doesn't even qualify a person to be a final arbiter of technical merit, much less anything else.

Thomas Bertilsson · May 16, 2011

vpwphoto said:
... I don't like to come off as an academic elitist, but I also don't like having a college education and master's pursuit dismissed.

Who says you have to have it dismissed? You can learn from people that aren't privileged with the same degree of education as you are, because knowledge is one thing, and wisdom is another, and common decency yet another.

We are not talking about absolutes, like proving Earth's gravity. We are dealing with OPINION. What one person thinks is art, another person might not think is art. Who is right? Everybody and nobody. It doesn't matter how many titles you show off or how many years of experience you have, because it is just OPINION.
Where are we if we can't respect each other's opinions?
Like I respect that Brian doesn't enjoy the photography of Sherman. That doesn't make it so that everybody has to agree with him, because regardless of background, knowledge, experience, and intelligence, it is still his opinion. Each and every person must be allowed to ascribe different qualities to an object, based on their own background.

Early Riser · May 16, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
Because we are all humans, and we all deserve respect. To dismiss someone's opinion, just because you think you know better is disrespectful and elitist.

If you think, for a minute, that you are better than others and don't show respect for their opinions, how do you expect that in return?

Thomas I respect you, but that doesn't mean that I am going to give you credibility in every area as compared to people who are educated, trained and heavily experienced in that area. If I'm feeling ill, I'll go see a doctor and get his/her opinion, I won't seek a medical opinion from a gardener, or a lawyer, or an electrician.

The problem is when it comes to photography, the designation of it being a profession has been blurred. An amateur will look at their photographs and think they are just as good as what a professional does, not realizing that in their case only the images that worked see the light of day, all the failures fade away, while for the professional EVERY image gets scrutinized. When every photo you take faces a possible audience of millions of people it's a whole different game. An amateur photographer has no clue as to how much they don't know. A professional knows that they can never learn all there is about photography.

I can understand the amateur point of view, because I was an amateur at one point. But how many of you have anything approaching the experience I have as a photographer?

And it's not a matter of my thinking I know more about photography than most of you, it's not an opinion, it's a fact. Would you assume that I know as much about your full time occupations as you do? So why is the assumption that my 34 years as a full time professional photographer, working in the most competitive area of photography and the most competitive market, doesn't count as having more photographic knowledge and wisdom than a decade or so as a part time amateur?

So who is being disrespectful? Me for assuming that decades of hard work, thorough training and study, thousands of assignments for demanding clients and tens of thousands of published images actually means something, or you for treating all those decades of hard work on my part as being meaningless.

Thomas you're the one insisting that I respect the opinion of others, even when I consider that opinion to be meritless. I don't have to respect anyone's opinion, but that does not mean I don't respect them.

Early Riser · May 16, 2011

zumbido said:
A person with years of success in commercial photography, has earned the right to say that what they did worked for them in the realm of commercial photography. That's about it. It doesn't even qualify a person to be a final arbiter of technical merit, much less anything else.

And that opinion is based on your many years as a commercial and fine art professional photographer? And actually when you mention technical merit, I'd say that a successful commercial photographer by DEFINITION is an arbiter of technical merit as a commercial photographer at the very least has to provide technically perfect work EVERY TIME.

zumbido · May 16, 2011

Early Riser said:
I can understand the amateur point of view, because I was an amateur at one point. But how many of you have anything approaching the experience I have as a photographer?

And it's not a matter of my thinking I know more about photography than most of you, it's not an opinion, it's a fact.

No, it's not. Your logic is faulty (in part) because there isn't just "photography". You know how to make something that sells in the areas in which you try to sell. That doesn't mean you have any credibility about any other part of the very large beast that is "photography", much less "art".

And I don't mean that offensively or personally, it applies to anyone anywhere and their professional experience. I can only know a tiny portion of software development.

zumbido · May 16, 2011

Early Riser said:
And that opinion is based on your many years as a commercial and fine art professional photographer? And actually when you mention technical merit, I'd say that a successful commercial photographer by DEFINITION is an arbiter of technical merit as a commercial photographer at the very least has to provide technically perfect work EVERY TIME.

What is "technically perfect"? A commercial photographer has to provide what will sell at a given location and moment of passing fashion, nothing more, nothing less. It's an achievement but it has nothing to do with some Platonic concept of "technical merit".

Edit to add: I'd agree with you if by "technical perfection" or merit you mean that a commercial photographer has to be able to deliver the look that a client wants in a given case (or emulate the look of something else, which is often/usually the case). In my field we talk about that in terms of "fitness for purpose", and then having the technical skill to achieve that. But that begs the question of what is the purpose of any given photograph, and Sherman's purpose may or may not have anything in common with the purpose of a photo to illustrate an advertisement in the front cover fold of ESPN Magazine or etc.--so commercial experience par excellence, no, does not make one an arbiter of technical merit for every kind of photography.

removed account4 · May 16, 2011

whether someone's work is good or bad is all opinion ... like everything else.

warden · May 16, 2011

Early Riser said:
Thomas I respect you, but that doesn't mean that I am going to give you credibility in every area as compared to people who are educated, trained and heavily experienced in that area. If I'm feeling ill, I'll go see a doctor and get his/her opinion, I won't seek a medical opinion from a gardener, or a lawyer, or an electrician.

If I hear photography compared to medicine again I'm going to need a doctor. Let's see if we can keep them straight; one requires an accredited education and a license before one can become a blowhard, and the other needs only a camera.

This thread is the best.

vpwphoto · May 16, 2011

Democritation of opinions...

This is what I don't like about APUG or Facebook (although there is also much to like).
I was criticized (or put in my place) in the APUG gallery (crit) for actually giving some less than glowing criticism. I said that is how criticism was handled in college, and I was told that college didn't carry too much weight at APUG or something like that (or at least how I took it).

Over on Facebook, I wasted time arguing with various people that think the Masons or whomever are keeping high mileage car technology out of the mainstream. I told them I photographed top researchers in the fields of energy, cancer, solar power etc... and see no sign of nefarious sorts keeping them down.

What any of this has to do with Sherman at this point I do not know... I feel for her in that she likely sold the print in question for a couple hundred dollars. I hope she can reap a good chunk of money form the momentum this sale caused love or despise her work.

Again I think she offers a window on her perception of her reality, just as I argued on Facebook that Spielberg's telling of the Tucker Torpedo story was not the whole story and was not the day capitalism died in America.

Early Riser · May 16, 2011

jawarden said:
If I hear photography compared to medicine again I'm going to need a doctor. Let's see if we can keep them straight; one requires an accredited education and a license before one can become a blowhard, and the other needs only a camera.

This thread is the best.

"..... and the other needs only a camera." That shows just how little you really know about photography.

$3,890,500!!!

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency