data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bb386/bb38688c052c7f8d0ef4a8e509aa717c4e1e653b" alt=""
BUT...
It was hanging in a prestigious gallery in the renown gallery district on NYC's West Side. This photo is a part of a series that was shown at the gallery I have an appointment with tomorrow. There are about 8 of these snapshots of Blythe-like dolls. Each dolls eye has a picture from history photoshopped into the reflection of their eyes. ho hum. Not for me. I wonder why, if the photos are still life and shot in a studio- AND not documentary or journalistic style. Then why not make the lighting interesting too?
I suppose, I just wanted to show you what I am up against tomorrow.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/03794/037947180695badb6b047fc8f8acee97d9cdf9b1" alt=""
vs.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/06a66/06a66e1e2798172f34aafe13554ecfbfd1a12613" alt=""
For me the choice is simple. For an art snob, the choice is equally as simple...
*the first two pics above are from an artist named Venieri the last pic is mine, but you knew that already!
1 comment:
Well, I think your stuff is superb, but then I'm not a snob. That other stuff is too much like kitsch. Digital kitsch. It's been done. Move on.
Post a Comment