Dead pig head with dead pig eyeballs.
pretty little waterfall.
okay. so what ya got here is a photo of a pig head that i took in Chinatown, NYC. And below it is a picture of a little waterfall street sculpture here at home. i turned the photo into a negative and kind of lightened it up and amplified contours and whatnot. so here's my question. Photo number one is representational and a little harsh to look at. Photo number two is almost perfectly abstract but serene and lovely (to my eyes). Which leads me to these questions: 1. Which of the two is a better photo? 2. Which one comes closer to approaching art? (No, I'm not pretentious enough to think either is art. But one may be closer than the other.) discuss.
the original waterfall picture is below. it was a nighttime shot.
Posts
.jpg)
14 comments:
I have to vote for art on the second one. But there's no reason why the first one can't be...I guess. The first one makes me say "Ooh. Pig." The second one makes me think "Ooh. Beauty, color, form." So I guess that is more arty than piggy.
Clearly the answer is #1, because it is morel like the kind of pictures I take than #2.
However, I have never take any pictures of dead pigs.
(Actually, by gut says #2 as being more "arty" yet my brain says both. How's that for utterly useless equivocation? Plus, my coffee hasn't fully kicked in and I have a headache, hence, my lucidity is questionable).
I prefer the original photo of the water feature over the other two but that is just my personal opinion. I think that is what art boils down to: personal opinion. I like photos that are abstract but still realistic (photo #3) but timekeeper (and others) will prefer the second photo over the other two for their own reasons. The first photo, while perhaps a bit more harsh, I believe is still art. You obviously put some thought into the framing and composition and you captured a moment in time from a unique perspective. That is the beauty of photography over painting or even video. The art is in that instant in time that can never be recreated but will now last forever.
By the way, I just bought a Nikon D90! I am very excited!
It depends on what you mean by art, and what the purpose of your art is. If you want thought/and or emotionally provoking, the dead pig is definitely more artsy. If art is simply beauty than the waterfall is more artsy.
That's a total cop-out response and it annoys me. I try again:
I vote for the dead pig. It's not pleasant to look at, whereas the waterfall definitely is, but I find myself more drawn to the dead pig because the waterfall, while pretty, doesn't offer me any reason to linger on its prettiness, whereas for reasons I wot not entirely of, the dead pig is somewhat fascinating.
I think the second one is more arty also.
But I actually like the original waterfall one better than the abstract one. I like the lights reflected in the water.
st-
i respect your reasoning, my friend. similar to mine when it comes to music. funny how when someone mirrors my taste in music i consider it a sign of brilliance.
hope your headache has gone away, and i hope you enjoyed the coffee. i plan on having some asap this morning.
one thing i will say is that if you say "ooh. pig." in a stronger way than you have in a long time, i'd be happy. william shatner's song "you're gonna die" makes a person think about the fact that, well, we're gonna die. and that means it approaches art in my books.
formerstudent--
tell me about the nikon D90!! i keep on dropping my stinkin' camera "accidentally" so i can be in the market for a new camera. how did you choose yours?
how you describe the art of photography describes some photography, but not all. some of my favorite photographs of real photographers aren't "caught moments," but rather were carefully planned and staged by the photographer.
some photography, like action shots, is exactly as you describe. and in general taking a good action shot requires more skill and different instincts than what i have.
s-s:
three things.
1. i must rethink dueling. not because i want to legalize it but because i want to think more clearly about why i don't want to legalize it.
2. at a recent politics and law society meeting, the fearless president invited students to propose possible debate topics. i exercised advising prerogative and threw dueling into the mix. it was rejected, alas.
3. i like your answer, and i especially like the fact you're not clear why you wnt to linger on the pig. that, it seems to me, is a strong indicator of the greater art-quotient of the pig.
no. 2. pretty. great. got it. movin' on.
no. 1. hmmm...unsettling. but. i. cannot. look. away.
i guess that also just describes spectacle. (sp?)
techno-sister:
i put the original up because i thought some people might prefer it. it is more interesting than the altered one fo sho. by i don't think it's as pretty.
second one is certainly more composed by me, if only digitally. and it's abstract, so i might strike us as more "arty." but i think sometimes art isn't very arty. and sometimes the uberarty isn't art.
how to define these things? hmm....in progress. i'll keep you posted.
Simply put, the Nikon D90 is the best camera for the money. It has the same 12.5 megapixel image sensor as the D300, Active D lighting, ISO from 200 to 3200 that can be digitally expanded to 100 to 6400, in lens image stabilizer, and many other pro features that you expect on a higher level SLR. It just came last Sunday so there are not a great deal of reviews for it yet, but if you look at the specs and go to Best Buy and get your hands on one I am sure you will fall in love just like I did. I walked in just to look and walked out with a new camera!
well, formerstudent, it sounds as though it's time for me to drop my crappy camera and purchase a real one.
now i feel like apologizing to my good and faithful camera.
ok for real now. i have to agree that the second one seems more artistic, for reasons of form and color as tk noted. perhaps also because you appear to have done more with it - molded it a bit more to your own vision, i suppose.
now the pig has more immediate shock value, but perhaps that's why i don't like it as well. it seems a bit more like a cheap thrill. but then my first thought wasn't exactly "death of a pig" in all its subtleties ..
and i must add my voice to those who prefer the original water picture. i'd put it on my wall. it's edgy, yet beautiful. acutally, perhaps i'd put both as a pair. that would be cool.
photo 1 - first viewing can make you gasp. definitely has shock value. great capture of a fact of life that we don't think much about (butchering of meat before it hits the table all prettied up). If art is meant to make you stop and think, this is it.
photo 2 - soft, conceptualized. reminds me of lobby or textbook cover art. completely inoffensive, relaxing, I suppose.
photo 3 - beautiful. captures the movement, lights at night. it's stimulating.
nice observations, j"p"c.
the more i think about it, the more i realize that the question is hard because none of the photos come close enough to real art to make sense of the art.
I'm in a mellow mood now, so right now my favorite is the middle one.
Post a Comment