A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

graffiti galore



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 16th 14, 06:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default graffiti galore

In article , PeterN wrote:

PeterN:
Here is some really good grafitti.


https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/five%20pointz%20partial.jpg


Sandman:
Not really. Everything between the windows was mediocre at best.
The photo is low res so it's haerd to see any detail, but the red
and circle ones on the lower wall has some potential, but doesn't
look very good from afar.


Prior to change of ownership, grafitti areas on that building was
reserved for recognized grafitti artists. You and I may not like
some of the images. Indeed I do not like a lot of the images either,
but they are recognized as art.


And art can be bad art. Calling it "art" doesn't change anything. I agree
that real graffiti *is* art, but that doesn't mean that it's good art.

PeterN:
The above is one of the last pictures that was taken. To avoid
litigation over historic designation, the eveving of the day I
took that pivture, the owner whitewashed entire building.


Sandman:
You should google "Puppet", a Swedish (from my hometown) graffiti
artist whose name is Daniel.


Here is one of his really early work (1989), from the Västerås
industrial port:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/Puppet©1989.jpg


Obviously, later work is a lot nicer.


I would not like that image hanging on my wall


Uh, of course not. It's graffiti, it's purpose is not to be on anyone's
wall.

but I recognize it as art. Fortunately, there is no one artbiter of which
art is better than others.


Other than your own. Plus, there's consensus.



--
Sandman[.net]
  #12  
Old October 16th 14, 06:27 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default graffiti galore

In article , sobriquet wrote:

Sandman:
Well, that's not graffiti as art, that's just color thrown on a
wall. My comments were purely in the scope of graffiti as an
artform, and these two do not fall into that category at all, and
ths register far lower than merely "crap"


You sound a bit like those clueless people who visit museums and
proclaim that their 3-year old can come up with something similar
every time they see an abstract work of art.


Then you're not listening.

If it doesn't fit their idea of art, it must be crap and they can't
work out that perhaps it's their concept of what constitutes a work
of art that's crap and not the creations they dismiss so easily.


Why not consult the dictionary?

Art
the expression or application of human creative skill and
imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or
sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for
their beauty or emotional power

Most of the images in your original link lacked most of the above. They
were not skillfully created, lacked imagination, and few conveyed any
beauty or emotional power.

I acknowledge that graffiti *is* art, but calling it art doesn't make it
good in itself. It can be bad art, art that lacks imagination, skill,
beauty or emotion. It's still art, just crap art.



--
Sandman[.net]
  #13  
Old October 16th 14, 06:43 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 741
Default graffiti galore

On 10/16/2014 1:22 PM, Sandman wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote:

PeterN:
Here is some really good grafitti.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/five%20pointz%20partial.jpg

Sandman:
Not really. Everything between the windows was mediocre at best.
The photo is low res so it's haerd to see any detail, but the red
and circle ones on the lower wall has some potential, but doesn't
look very good from afar.


Prior to change of ownership, grafitti areas on that building was
reserved for recognized grafitti artists. You and I may not like
some of the images. Indeed I do not like a lot of the images either,
but they are recognized as art.


And art can be bad art. Calling it "art" doesn't change anything. I agree
that real graffiti *is* art, but that doesn't mean that it's good art.


That's a good point. Not everybody likes the same thing. Some people
like lobster, I prefer snow crab legs and scallops. Yet all are food.
are food.


PeterN:
The above is one of the last pictures that was taken. To avoid
litigation over historic designation, the eveving of the day I
took that pivture, the owner whitewashed entire building.

Sandman:
You should google "Puppet", a Swedish (from my hometown) graffiti
artist whose name is Daniel.


Here is one of his really early work (1989), from the Västerås
industrial port:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/Puppet©1989.jpg


Obviously, later work is a lot nicer.


I would not like that image hanging on my wall


Uh, of course not. It's graffiti, it's purpose is not to be on anyone's
wall.

but I recognize it as art. Fortunately, there is no one artbiter of which
art is better than others.


Other than your own. Plus, there's consensus.

Which morphs.




--
PeterN
  #14  
Old October 16th 14, 07:41 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
sobriquet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 398
Default graffiti galore

On Thursday, October 16, 2014 7:27:44 PM UTC+2, Sandman wrote:
[..]
Why not consult the dictionary?



Art

the expression or application of human creative skill and

imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or

sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for

their beauty or emotional power



Most of the images in your original link lacked most of the above. They

were not skillfully created, lacked imagination, and few conveyed any

beauty or emotional power.


In your unfounded and misguided opinion it might lack imagination,
skill or fail to induce pleasing aesthetic sensations, but perhaps
you're just another clueless cultural barbarian who lightly
dismisses the creative efforts of others.
Who are you to dictate to others what is supposed to evoke an
emotional or aesthetic response?

Now you might claim that the work doesn't appeal to you or to
say that you have different preferences regarding the kind of
creative expression you tend to find inspirational, but to dismiss
it as crap like you do is really just an illustration of your own
lack of any creative imagination and impaired capacity to
appreciate the creative skills of others.



I acknowledge that graffiti *is* art, but calling it art doesn't make it

good in itself. It can be bad art, art that lacks imagination, skill,

beauty or emotion. It's still art, just crap art.







--

Sandman[.net]


  #15  
Old October 16th 14, 08:12 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 741
Default graffiti galore

On 10/16/2014 2:41 PM, sobriquet wrote:
On Thursday, October 16, 2014 7:27:44 PM UTC+2, Sandman wrote:
[..]
Why not consult the dictionary?



Art

the expression or application of human creative skill and

imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or

sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for

their beauty or emotional power



Most of the images in your original link lacked most of the above. They

were not skillfully created, lacked imagination, and few conveyed any

beauty or emotional power.


In your unfounded and misguided opinion it might lack imagination,
skill or fail to induce pleasing aesthetic sensations, but perhaps
you're just another clueless cultural barbarian who lightly
dismisses the creative efforts of others.
Who are you to dictate to others what is supposed to evoke an
emotional or aesthetic response?

Now you might claim that the work doesn't appeal to you or to
say that you have different preferences regarding the kind of
creative expression you tend to find inspirational, but to dismiss
it as crap like you do is really just an illustration of your own
lack of any creative imagination and impaired capacity to
appreciate the creative skills of others.


Is just possible that an image fails to communicate simply because the
maker failed to communicate with respect to that image.



I acknowledge that graffiti *is* art, but calling it art doesn't make it

good in itself. It can be bad art, art that lacks imagination, skill,

beauty or emotion. It's still art, just crap art.







--

Sandman[.net]




--
PeterN
  #16  
Old October 17th 14, 08:21 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default graffiti galore

In article , sobriquet wrote:

Sandman:
[..] Why not consult the dictionary?


Art the expression or application of human creative skill and
imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or
sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their
beauty or emotional power


Most of the images in your original link lacked most of the above.
They were not skillfully created, lacked imagination, and few
conveyed any beauty or emotional power.


In your unfounded and misguided opinion it might lack imagination,


No, in my experienced opinion.

skill or fail to induce pleasing aesthetic sensations, but perhaps
you're just another clueless cultural barbarian who lightly
dismisses the creative efforts of others.


Or maybe I just have a better understanding about art than you do.

Who are you to dictate to others what is supposed to evoke an emotional
or aesthetic response?


I'm not. I am passing judgement on the graffiti you posted, of which most
were crap, based on my experience of what is really good graffiti.

Now you might claim that the work doesn't appeal to you or to say
that you have different preferences regarding the kind of creative
expression you tend to find inspirational, but to dismiss it as crap
like you do is really just an illustration of your own lack of any
creative imagination and impaired capacity to appreciate the
creative skills of others.


Bull****, as expected. All claims here are an expression of personal
opinion. If I were to be kind, I might say they don't reach the level of
art that I would appreciate, but being experienced in art and graffiti, I
can tell that above my personal opinion, most of the graffiti in the link
lack skill, imagination and beauty, and most were crap.

You are free to disagree til your face turns blue, doesn't make them any
better.


--
Sandman[.net]
  #17  
Old October 17th 14, 02:09 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
sobriquet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 398
Default graffiti galore

On Friday, October 17, 2014 9:21:34 AM UTC+2, Sandman wrote:
[..]
In your unfounded and misguided opinion it might lack imagination,



No, in my experienced opinion.



skill or fail to induce pleasing aesthetic sensations, but perhaps


you're just another clueless cultural barbarian who lightly


dismisses the creative efforts of others.




Or maybe I just have a better understanding about art than you do.


I think you understand about as little about art as you understand about
the tacky quality of iphone pics.




Who are you to dictate to others what is supposed to evoke an emotional


or aesthetic response?




I'm not. I am passing judgement on the graffiti you posted, of which most

were crap, based on my experience of what is really good graffiti.


An unfounded and silly judgement that primarily shows your narrow minded
opinion as to what constitutes creativity or art.



Now you might claim that the work doesn't appeal to you or to say


that you have different preferences regarding the kind of creative


expression you tend to find inspirational, but to dismiss it as crap


like you do is really just an illustration of your own lack of any


creative imagination and impaired capacity to appreciate the


creative skills of others.




Bull****, as expected. All claims here are an expression of personal

opinion. If I were to be kind, I might say they don't reach the level of

art that I would appreciate, but being experienced in art and graffiti, I

can tell that above my personal opinion, most of the graffiti in the link

lack skill, imagination and beauty, and most were crap.


Your opinion is crap by randomly claiming some images to be worthwhile
and all the other images to be worthless crap.

And then you see some iphone images and you get all excited and claiming
these are stunning works of art, while most are really just mediocre
crap you see being regurgitated ad nauseam at all the photo sites.





You are free to disagree til your face turns blue, doesn't make them any

better.


  #18  
Old October 17th 14, 03:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default graffiti galore

In article , sobriquet wrote:

sobriquet:
skill or fail to induce pleasing aesthetic sensations, but
perhaps you're just another clueless cultural barbarian who
lightly dismisses the creative efforts of others.


Sandman:
Or maybe I just have a better understanding about art than you do.


I think you understand about as little about art as you understand
about the tacky quality of iphone pics.


You're an idiot troll. Have a nice day.


--
Sandman[.net]
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Incredible graffiti covered building in New York City Pylon Digital Photography 10 March 24th 07 04:08 AM
Incredible graffiti covered building in New York City Frank H Digital Photography 0 March 23rd 07 12:42 AM
Incredible graffiti covered building in New York City Pylon 35mm Photo Equipment 1 March 22nd 07 10:01 PM
FA: Accessories * Galore * for 35mm, Med. Format, Darkroom, Subminiature, Etc. Bob R. 35mm Equipment for Sale 0 June 28th 04 03:30 AM
FA: Hasselblad Camera Accessories Galore Bob R. Medium Format Equipment For Sale 0 August 31st 03 04:20 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.