Author Topic: Which iStock photographers do you admire the most? (Read 3387 times)

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #25 on:** June 14, 2011, 12:56 »

Quote from: loop on June 14, 2011, 12:54

Quote from: SNP on June 14, 2011, 12:49
Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 14, 2011, 12:07
Being "part of our culture" as an artist means having the right friends and/or doing a good job of self-promotion. The quality of the artwork is a secondary factor because it's all subjective, anyway.

exactly.

And having the talent as well. Don't forget that part.

No, that's secondary.

lthn · « **Reply #26 on:** June 14, 2011, 14:13 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 14, 2011, 12:07

Being "part of our culture" as an artist means having the right friends and/or doing a good job of self-promotion. The quality of the artwork is a secondary factor because it's all subjective, anyway.

true, but I disagree about quality of art being subjective. Imho, that's a misconcept, as is with beauty (especially human beauty), it's not even remotely as subjective as most ppl think. Actually this 'art and beauty in art is subjective' started spreading after Warhol imho... so they can say that anything can be art, which very is comfortable for such talentless freak showman as Warhol and the like, and the pple who sell "art". Just as fat ugly women and the ppl who want them to buy somethng or vote for somethgn like to say that beauty is subjective. Yep, I'm anti-pc.

bhr · « **Reply #27 on:** June 14, 2011, 14:22 »

Quote from: lthn on June 14, 2011, 14:13

I disagree about quality of art being subjective. Imho, that's a misconcept, as is with beauty (especially human beauty), it's not even remotely as subjective as most ppl think. Actually this 'art and beauty in art is subjective' started spreading after Warhol imho... so they can say that anything can be art, which very is comfortable for such talentless freak showman as Warhol and the like, and the pple who sell "art". Just as fat ugly women and the ppl who want them to buy somethng or vote for somethgn like to say that beauty is subjective. Yep, I'm anti-pc.

What-is-art conversations are pointless. All educated adults know this. However the "anything can be art" argument (which I am personally broadly sympathetic to but would not argue) long predates Andy Warhol. Eg Marcel Duchamp. At least get your history right.

lthn · « **Reply #28 on:** June 14, 2011, 14:52 »

Quote from: bunhill on June 14, 2011, 14:22

Quote from: lthn on June 14, 2011, 14:13
I disagree about quality of art being subjective. Imho, that's a misconcept, as is with beauty (especially human beauty), it's not even remotely as subjective as most ppl think. Actually this 'art and beauty in art is subjective' started spreading after Warhol imho... so they can say that anything can be art, which very is comfortable for such talentless freak showman as Warhol and the like, and the pple who sell "art". Just as fat ugly women and the ppl who want them to buy somethng or vote for somethgn like to say that beauty is subjective. Yep, I'm anti-pc.

What-is-art conversations are pointless. All educated adults know this. However the "anything can be art" argument (which I am personally broadly sympathetic to but would not argue) long predates Andy Warhol. Eg Marcel Duchamp. At least get your history right.

'Anything is art' is for the uneducated and the naiv, who are as usual mislead by all who just want to entitle themselves artist instead of living up to the title. It's mostly a money grab: why wait for years for an artist to grow skills, and finish a painting with great care, when you can just sell used tin cans to the clueless? : ) There are rules for compositon, color, proportion and tones, they are nice, they work, and they can be combined in amazing complexity which all comes naturally and effortlesly to the talented and properly trained : )

jbarber873 · « **Reply #29 on:** June 14, 2011, 15:08 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on June 13, 2011, 19:52

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on June 13, 2011, 17:58
Me.

Dang! You beat me to it. LOL

I'm with you Warren. I also admire PaulieWalnuts!

loop · « **Reply #30 on:** June 14, 2011, 15:30 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 14, 2011, 12:56

Quote from: loop on June 14, 2011, 12:54
Quote from: SNP on June 14, 2011, 12:49
Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 14, 2011, 12:07
Being "part of our culture" as an artist means having the right friends and/or doing a good job of self-promotion. The quality of the artwork is a secondary factor because it's all subjective, anyway.

exactly.

And having the talent as well. Don't forget that part.

No, that's secondary.

Hum, all this reminds me a comic artist (I mean a cartoonist) I knew. He wasn't very gifted, but he used to say that should he had the contacts of Moebius an should he got paid like Moebous, he would dran like him, or even better,

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #31 on:** June 14, 2011, 23:41 »

Quote from: loop on June 14, 2011, 15:30

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 14, 2011, 12:56
Quote from: loop on June 14, 2011, 12:54
Quote from: SNP on June 14, 2011, 12:49
Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 14, 2011, 12:07
Being "part of our culture" as an artist means having the right friends and/or doing a good job of self-promotion. The quality of the artwork is a secondary factor because it's all subjective, anyway.

exactly.

And having the talent as well. Don't forget that part.

No, that's secondary.

Hum, all this reminds me a comic artist (I mean a cartoonist) I knew. He wasn't very gifted, but he used to say that should he had the contacts of Moebius an should he got paid like Moebous, he would dran like him, or even better,

Yeah, well, if only I had the contacts and the gallery access not only could I produce glass tanks full of the decomposing corpses of animals, I could up the ante by using endangered animals and have you crunching over a floor carpeted in fake animal feed and going past an unmade bed to reach them. Or something like that.