Andreas Gursky: Rhein II

rawhead

Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
588
Location
Boston, MA
Format
Medium Format
Why?: because there are people who are willing to pay crap tons of money on meta-stuff, not just how good the thing per se is.
Why not?: cuz there's crap tons of minimal landscape photos, just on Flickr alone, that's better than this mediocre piece.
 

Ross Chambers

Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2004
Messages
701
Location
Blue Mountai
Format
Multi Format
Great sky(?) I have those problems too.

I guess it's a case of the one percent who have the money to spend on the one percent of artists who command this amount having the taste to determine the market.

The AGNSW had the enormous dime store print--a previous large money spinner record I believe-- on show a while ago, it was pretty boring up close. You would need a very large house to hang it, but I suppose the buyers own office blocks or galleries.
 

MDR

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
1,402
Location
Austria
Format
Multi Format
Because it's big and a CEO can hang it behind his Desk or the Lobby. Gursky's fame has in my opionion nothing to do with how good his photographs are (mostly boring) and everything to do with how big they are furthemore he is part of the Becher clicque which mostly consists of overated photographers with good connections to the art market.

Dominik
 

Ulrich Drolshagen

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
529
Location
Germany
Format
Medium Format
I don't want to open a can of worms again, but the picture is not a photograph. It is a composite made of a photograph. Gursky himself does not claim his pictures being photographs. Gursky is not making pictures, nice to look at, but ideas and concepts you can look at. Some may consider them nice to look at or at least interesting.These ideas and concepts are considered being art. You will have to know and appreciate this to appreciate his pictures. As far as I know, he isn't even making all of the pictures entirely himself.
It's not Gursky making the money but the owner of the picture/gallery who is making the money (though it may not have been cheap in the first place I suppose. He addressing a certain audience by making his pictures large).

Ulrich
 
Last edited by a moderator:

rawhead

Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
588
Location
Boston, MA
Format
Medium Format

I don't want to open a can of worms, either, but what you just described is something *I* would still consider a photograph (or part of what constitutes the modern photographic process), and, in light of other photographs (or *works of art* *ideas and concepts* etc., if you prefer) that are out there, this particular one is still quite boring.

Also, I don't think anyone is particularly accusatory of Gursky per se. After all, he's not the one paying or even suggesting how much his photographs should be traded at.

The only good point I've seen so far is regarding the size of his prints. Maybe we should all start printing huge
 
OP
OP

M.A.Longmore

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
2,024
Location
Drinking From A Fountain
Format
Multi Format

benjiboy

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
11,970
Location
U.K.
Format
35mm
It's another example of "the emperors new clothes" school of photography" :confused:
 

CGW

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
2,896
Format
Medium Format
Art without commerce is a hobby. Any stronger proof needed?
 

phaedrus

Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
466
Location
Waltershause
Format
Multi Format
Ach, I liked matters better when his 99 ct store picture was the record holder. That had an appreciable irony whereas a very big picture of a very teutonic river for a very big price hasn't.
 

CGW

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
2,896
Format
Medium Format
benjiboy said:
On the contrary, commerce without art is a hobby in this case.
Click to expand...

You so don't get it, do you? Just more of the usual, endless, uncomprehending sour grapes whenever anything unconventional rolls by here.
 

MaximusM3

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
754
Location
NY
Format
35mm RF
CGW said:
You so don't get it, do you? Just more of the usual, endless, uncomprehending sour grapes whenever anything unconventional rolls by here.
Click to expand...


Some get it, some don't. The ones who do are obviously willing to pay millions for it and the ones who don't, wouldn't drop a dime. As always, to each his own. Human nature. What gets tiring is the same old arguments that don't have a leg to stand on. Art is purely subjective and someone's crap may be someone else's gold. I am sometimes amazed at how much money some prints sell for (inkjet and non), just like I am sometimes amazed that someone would by one of my prints that I think is nothing special. I think we can all quit the judging and go make some pictures.
 

jglass

Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2007
Messages
399
Location
Austin
Format
Multi Format
My comments are long and unbelievably fascinating (and self-serving). Check em out at my blog, linked in my signature.
 

MDR

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
1,402
Location
Austria
Format
Multi Format
Was the photo sold by Gursky or by a private collector if it is the later gursky won't see a dime from the sale, the same thing with Sherman's selfportrait. Gursky's photo is not my taste but tastes differ furthermore the art market has nothing to do with art and everything to do with the market. Art is sold like stock and just like the stockmarket it mostly produces bubbles created by some selfserving individuals. Never forget who Damien Hearst's best costumer is the answer is simple Damien Hearst. He buys most of his works and creates the illusion of being one of the most expensive Artists in the world, while in reality he buys the stuff himself basically he's a fraud. I doubt that Gursky buys his own work I rather believe that the market creates artist no matter what the artists does for the simple reason to have something to sell.

Dominik
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…