Well, here's what I think about Rhine II: I don't know. I've never really seen it. I've seen representations and scaled down copies of it but before I can really comment I'd have to personally experience one of the six existing copies of it and spend some time with with same. After all isn't it's scale part of tbe message?
That being said, I think part of what many see as problematic with it is summed up thusly: "I coulda takin' the same thing with m' iPhone when me 'n Mabel wint ta Europe there, las' summer!" But of course Jeb didn't and if he did, it surely isn't hanging up in the Tate Modern just now, so there must be something special about Gursky's piece. I like the proportions, the colours and what it says, the fact that the Rhine, or at least portions of it and other industrial "working" rivers, are about as far-removed from Nature as an Interstate Highway or the Autobahn. I have a problem with its value, to be sure, but that has more to do with the fine art industry than whether it's a good or great photo. Its value (or more precisely, its price) make it a pretty juicy target for reactionary "critics" in the right wing tabloids and make it hard for anyone to be objective... I've said too much already. So I'll stop. But I'm with you, Ann! Cheers, frank On 29 September, 2015 11:24:38 PM EDT, ann sanfedele <ann...@nyc.rr.com> wrote: >On 9/29/2015 11:07 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: > >......(snip snip) >> The issue I have is when someone represents a composite photo as >reality. > >Me too, P.J. > >I rather like RHINE II , actually. But then I like Kenneth Noland too > >ann > >> >> On 9/29/2015 10:57 PM, Knarf wrote: >>> Well, for one thing Rhine II sold for $4.3 million while this piece >>> of dreck is on Facebook. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> frank >>> >>> On 29 September, 2015 10:13:37 PM EDT, "P.J. Alling" >>> <webstertwenty...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Though the technique leaves a bit to be desired, is this really any >>>> different than Rhine II? >>>> >>>> On 9/29/2015 8:43 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: >>>>> I'm normally averse to grabbing other people's shots from >Facebook, >>>>> but this fake really pissed me off. I forget who the (claimed) >>>>> photographer is, but that's just as well. This is allegedly an >>>> "antler >>>>> arch" in Jackson Hole, Wyoming photographed at such an angle as to >>>> put >>>>> the lunar eclipse right next to it. Count the ways in which this >>>>> screams "fake"... before you even try opening it up in Photoshop >and >>>>> brightening it enough to see how shitty the cut-and-paste really >was. >>>>> >>>>> http://www.robertstech.com/temp/FakeRedMoon.jpg >> >> -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
