I think you should have been more literal and photographed the persons and placed human fluids on the print.
I think you should have been more literal and photographed the persons and placed human fluids on the print.
I think the problem we're having here is that some people are confusing the term "naked" with the term "neked". That is all.
~Joe
The photograph and the thing being photographed are not the same thing.
For those not in the US (or not familiar with southern usage) it's a matter of pronunciation.
Naked - you ain't got any clothes on.
Nekkid - you ain't got any clothes on and you're up to somethin'.
Very funny image, ustas! Man, those are cruel shoes!
Vaughn
PS -- on my screen, I would go with something between the two -- but that could just be my screen. And obviously not porn since it has an urn on a plinth.
While earning a BA in art and during postgruate studies I developed an appreciation for well-crafted art. Your painting does convey some of the intended message, but is too crude to be effective as art. Precise drawing can elicit more emotion than this casual symbolism. Perhaps studies in psycology instead of art would make it more interesting. Fortunately, if Freud ever dabbled in art, it hasn't been inflicted upon the World. You should have either have keep the client informed about the progress of the painting so he could raise objections earlier, or given his money back.
I didn't understand the comment of "a thousand words" either. I agree that it's annoyig, disappointing even iunfuriating to have bland comments to a shocking image as if everyone is asleep!
Georg,
This might be giving too much credit to the viewer, LOL! After all, art is made when the creator looks at it and has the feelings and emotions erupt that he/she hoped for. Then there's life in the nostrils of the work and it is art. Art, after all is a matter of saved fascinations in physical form that can develop a life of their own, even surviving long after us. Not everyone will have the education, culture or aesthetic freedoms to be open to this new experience. So whether or not we have a whole bunch of folk lining up to enjoy your picture is besides the point. It does not depend on us to validate your work. You've already done that. Now if a lot of us enjoy it too, then you might have commercial value added to your work but it was art as soon as you embedded your ideas into it in physical form. Sure it's some viewers with power/influence/expertise or money that can infuse added value to your art, but fundamentally, it's only you who's opinion counts as prime maker.
I missed that and will update myself. But for now, just this picture.
Georg Kara: Shot in LF
"for a Scottsdale area swinger who has a lot of money and a bankrupt morality"
Georg,
I find this picture most engaging and provocative. At first glance I thought it was a photograph that had been manipulated but the erect phallus expanding towards the distal end and the presence of supra pubic testicles, testified to the falsity of this image. It's a caricature of a photograph of a couple as if they are perhaps shamed and held to account after some extreme ejaculation, maybe from the excitement of carrying out and act that's so base and immoral that they are now feel their behavior is judged. The are young and perhaps even brother and sister. She's no doubt very young and could be just pubescent.
Seeing a B&W photographic like work of art with a touch or red, reminds me of the difference one red dot makes to an otherwise good Artar lens.
This is like that, a red decorated picture. Red is the color of shame and passion as well as violence, rape and destruction.
There's no beauty here. Just two shamed person standing before us. Interestingly, the nipples on the man shine like eyes from a dark background observing us and perhaps asking us our own motivations in looking at their self-imposed reckless plight.
This work, although obscure, seems well thought out, fascinating and worth revisiting. What might it reveal about ourselves as voyeurs?
Asher
Bookmarks