Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/05/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]George, I enjoy nude photos just as much as the next guy. ?However, I find nothing good about this photo at all. ?The composition, exposure, pose are all bad, a bad snapshot in my opinion. ?It gets its value from who took it and the subject, and nothing else. ?To me it is a bad snapshot by a famous photographer. Gene ? -------------- Original message from George Lottermoser <imagist3 at mac.com>: -------------- > Well said Douglas. > I find the knee jerk, negative reaction to blatant human sexuality, > paradoxically, both understandable [because of cultural taboos] and > odd [because of my personal appreciation of beauty]. > > Does anyone think this is not a a well composed rectangular frame of > a beautiful young woman in her prime? > I assume that if she wore jeans some, who object, would find it a > beautiful photograph. > So does it come down to "we're not supposed to see [or be shown] > human genitals in photographs?" > It's okay to photograph the horrors of war but not the beauty of > sexuality and human desire? > Then take the judgement so far as to judge the model a "slut?" > > If this image were a beautiful drawing or painting would some of the > objectors have a less prudish reaction? > Most painters and sculptors, we now admire as historically "best," > have similar poses in their body of work. > Is the photographic medium just too "real" for reality? > > Regards, > George Lottermoser > george at imagist.com > http://www.imagist.com > http://www.imagist.com/blog > http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist > > On May 1, 2009, at 6:46 AM, Douglas Barry wrote: > > > > > "Frank Filippone" wrote > >> $37.5K is cheap? > >> > >> I am jealous... I wish I could sell some garbage photos for this > >> kind of cash....... forget the topic of a nude..... > >> > >> I have seen a lot of stuff that I consider garbage, in collections > >> like the Getty, MOMA, and others. Big prints, probably big > >> bucks. I really wonder if art collectors and gallery owners, and > >> Museums actually have anyone on staff that knows the difference > >> between something worthwhile and something that is worthless... > >> worthless in the sense of intrinsic value, qualitative value, or > >> otherwise quality in general. > >>>>>>>>> > > > > Sorry, have to disagree. > > > > People decide what moves them, and what to pay for it. What one > > person likes may not necessarily be liked by you or I, but, for the > > person who buys it, it may pull a certain string in their heart. > > The fact that the price reached 37.5k was not just driven by the > > image but also by the combination of the Friedlander & Ciccione > > names, just as the presence of an Olympic recordholder adds lustre > > & price to a sports image: a similar image of a club athlete at a > > small local sports event would not necessarily have the same cachet > > or price. > > > > Anyway, I liked the confrontational composition which we all seem > > to agree was confrontational :-) > > > > Regards > > > > Douglas > > _________ > > Douglas Barry > > Bray, Co. Wicklow > > Republic of Ireland > > > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/DouglasBray/MiguelGeary.jpg.html > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information