Re: List of the most expensive photographs
Don't worry, Corran ... I've had my fifteen seconds of fame more than once and you
might be a little surprised at who purchased my work. Big deal. Been there, done that. Like I said, if I wanted to play games, I know how. I just don't want to. Money is not my measure of success. Landing the image in front of me and communicating it in the
print is, rather than inventing something fictional second-hand. Read the daybooks of Weston and you'll find an analogous attitude. But I don't regard this as an "older" or "traditional" style of photography at all (speaking of snobby stereotypes). Maybe its
taking the puzzle head-on instead of faking it.
Re: List of the most expensive photographs
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
What's impersonal about record prices? It a remarkable show-window on both demographics and the whole parasitic groupie mentality surrounding contemporary art.
Then doesn't it also show the parasitic groupie mentality surrounding old art? The list includes work by Steichen, Weston (2 pieces), Stieglitz (2 pieces), Atget, and Ansel Adams.
Re: List of the most expensive photographs
Quote:
Originally Posted by
John NYC
Not sure exactly what institutions you are targeting here in NYC with this rhetoric.
At all times the MOMA displays a rotating part of their permanent collection in the most prominent room dedicated to photography, and it is a collection which dates back to the beginning of photography.
Also, I don't see galleries or museums here devaluing older forms of art in favor of exclusively contemporary. Several galleries are currently having shows of photographers who worked only traditionally.
Well, exactly. There are museums, dealers, and collectors of every persuation here. There are galleries that only show 19th century photography, and one gallery that I know of that only shows platinum prints.
Mr. Wiley seems to have invented a city for the purpose of hating.
I actually think there's too much emphasis on old, dead masters in the blue chip galleries. I stopped going to the AIPAD show because it was mostly stuff I could see in Art History books or at the Met. I'm more interested in people who are alive, waiting to be discovered. I want to see what I don't already know.
Re: List of the most expensive photographs
Quote:
Originally Posted by
paulr
I actually think there's too much emphasis on old, dead masters in the blue chip galleries. I stopped going to the AIPAD show because it was mostly stuff I could see in Art History books or at the Met. I'm more interested in people who are alive, waiting to be discovered. I want to see what I don't already know.
This year AIPAD was not overrun with old masters. There was a mix of just about everything you can think of.
Re: List of the most expensive photographs
Quote:
Originally Posted by
John NYC
This year AIPAD was not overrun with old masters. There was a mix of just about everything you can think of.
Yeah, I should probably go check it out again. It's been many years.