Genius or insane. What do you think of this guy's work?

frank · Nov 12, 2016

jnanian said:
i don't really think about genre, its just a label ... if the imagery can
keep my attention whether it is like the work linked to, or an urban/suburban landscape,
deadpan/highend portrait, or still life i enjoy it. too many labels and they distract from the imagery.

Sure. But when we discuss things, labels and words are useful for communication.

removed account4 · Nov 12, 2016

frank said:
Sure. But when we discuss things, labels and words are useful for communication.

to a certain extant they are, but unfortunately they divide people more than they bring people together ...

rpavich · Nov 12, 2016

I just shot one just like one of those... i reached down to pick up my camera while at a stop light and accidentally hit the shutter and took an out of focus picture of my steering wheel and my windshield.

When my dark room prints come out like that I just toss the piece of paper and get a new one.

jerrybro · Nov 17, 2016

I don't get it.

Ron789 · Nov 17, 2016

Hard to judge from some screen images. Were Jackson Pollock, Willem de Kooning and Mark Rothko genius or insane? If you were to present their work in this form the obvious conclusion is.... insane. But if you stand in front of their original pieces of art... different story.

sepiareverb · Nov 17, 2016

Right up my alley. Thanks for the link.

mynewcolour · Nov 17, 2016

I like it.

I'd like to see a gallery. I'm not sure a book is optimum. I never like an image over a double page spread and I think these suffer particularly.

removed account4 · Nov 19, 2016

hi mynewcolour,
i hav been doign similar work for decades ... and to be honest
sometimes small prints in a book work well for these types of images.
i've made a handful of small japanese bound books with small experimental images in them
but they are never images on front/back of the same page, each image is a page...
i've thought about sending a stack of jpgs to blurp but just can't get myself to do it.

fitou143 · Nov 20, 2016

not for me not my cup of Tea but then again I don't drink Tea.

Peter Schrager · Nov 20, 2016

Here's my take...as I belong to to the alternative photography group on Facebook too I'm seeing lots and I mean lots of this kind of work...trying to think of the British artist who used pissed and shit to make art...well it worked and he sells art for millions...art is what it is and you either go for it or not...when I make a photograph my main concern is do I get ANY kind of reaction..that part is good..
I'm just a little overwhelmed by all these people trying to push boundaries. ..
I'm familiar with alison rossiter and her work
she collected a massive collection of old photo paper . .exposed it and did a series
It worked but to me it's what they teach you in art school . ..good clever novel??
Good to have these discussions
Best Peter

pdeeh · Nov 20, 2016

is there something wrong with being taught things in art school or have I misunderstood you Peter?

Bob Carnie · Nov 20, 2016

Alison's flashlight series was the first I saw , I am purchasing the image of the horse from her dealer at some point. I liked this series quite a bit, her last series of fogged out paper really did
not catch me like the first body of work I saw of hers.

She used painting with light on paper quite effectively, I know it has been done before but her version was very nice.

Alan Klein · Nov 20, 2016

You have to do something different to sell. So he's crazy like a fox.

frank · Nov 20, 2016

Best answer yet. ^

removed account4 · Nov 20, 2016

Alan Klein said:
You have to do something different to sell. So he's crazy like a fox.

sorry i think this is a lot of bunk,

frank · Nov 20, 2016

One can only speculate on the motives of the artist. Therefore it is not necessarily bunk.

removed account4 · Nov 20, 2016

usually when people speculate about the motives of others they make fools of themselves ...

frank · Nov 20, 2016

jnanian said:
usually when people "speculate" the motives of other people they make fools of themselves

But that's what you did in your post. But I see you've edited that part out. You speculatively assigned honourable artistic motives and dismiss Alan and my speculation of being different to stand out.

removed account4 · Nov 20, 2016

no, i was talking about myself, and i edited it out ...
it wasn't a projection / speculation.

and i''ll say it again, sounds like a lot of bunk

removed account4 · Nov 20, 2016

Alan Klein said:
You have to do something different to sell

what does selling have to do with anything ?

you can't make photographs or paintings or sculptures or whatever
just for making them?

was it specifically stated in the webpage that he was doing this
as someone who was picked up by a gallery and they wanted to exploit his talents ?

i used google translate to understand the webpage, and didn't see anything about how
he was making photographs like this to make lots of money. maybe he was making a book
of the photographs that would be available for someone to purchase on a website like "blurb"
but i doubt that he would make back the $$ it took him to make the photographs he made,
even at the american minimum wage at 1hr/print and 20mins/exposure.

ValoPeikko · Nov 20, 2016

I find this sort of study in the medium of photography rather interesting. I would love to see exhibition of this kind of pieces. My own style has developed towards non-representational recently, but it's still not abstract. There's a recognizable part (landscape, trees, hands, human form, etc..) and then there's the subject matter which might be something else completely.

Linked work seems to be mainly about composition and study of form. As such it's pleasing and quite non-disruptive to the art photography scene. But still trying to find it's limits and ones creative vision. I applaud the project, even if I wouldn't want to look at those pieces on my own walls necessarily (but in a gallery, for sure).

pdeeh · Nov 21, 2016

I think we all know by now, if it isn't a rock, a mountain or a forest in the USA, shot with perfect sharpness and printed like Stieglitz would have wanted, then it just isn't legitimate photography. I mean, the man might as well have used digital!

DREW WILEY · Nov 21, 2016

It's called mildew. Next time the dude should store his film in a dry place.

tomfrh · Nov 21, 2016

I like it.

Eric Rose · Nov 21, 2016

Sorry the indicated images leave me cold. They don't speak to me at all.

Genius or insane. What do you think of this guy's work?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency