Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Frankly, reading that about Lik, I am reminded of the following quote: "Arrogance on the part of the meritorious is even more offensive to us than the arrogance of those without merit: for merit itself is offensive." - Friedrich Nietzsche On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Brian Walters wrote: > Quoting John : > >> Old FY or new FY? > > > > Reminds me of one of my favourite quotes from 'The Odd Couple'... > > Oscar to Felix: "You leave me little notes on my pillow. I told you 158 > times I can't stand little notes on my pillow. "We're all out of cornflakes. > F.U." Took me three hours to figure out F.U. was Felix Ungar!" > > > > -- > Cheers > > Brian > > ++ > Brian Walters > Western Sydney Australia > http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ > > > > -- > 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. -- Life is too short to put up with bad bokeh. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Quoting John : Old FY or new FY? Reminds me of one of my favourite quotes from 'The Odd Couple'... Oscar to Felix: "You leave me little notes on my pillow. I told you 158 times I can't stand little notes on my pillow. "We're all out of cornflakes. F.U." Took me three hours to figure out F.U. was Felix Ungar!" -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Old FY or new FY? On 2/24/2015 5:13 PM, John Coyle wrote: From a company memo some years ago: "PWT/FB re EIBT for FY 1980" John in Brisbane -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Bill Sent: Wednesday, 25 February 2015 6:18 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT more on Peter Lik On 24/02/2015 1:50 PM, Jack Davis wrote: Well, we could get Mark on that "on line manual" and he could knock off his naps to complete it. Let us know what he says, Bill. Heh. The game was, of course, to see how many acronyms one could use in a sentence that still made some sense. bill -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
On 2015-02-24 11:20 , Bill wrote: The company I used to work for had enough acronyms that they ended up publishing an online manual listing them and what they stood for. It made for fun conversations. sometime in the late 80s i worked for NBI; a few hundred people worked there, and everyone i knew stuck to the story that the name stood for Nothing But Initials; leave it to PDML to inspire me to research it again … turns out it was Necton Bylinnium Inc -- 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.
RE: OT more on Peter Lik
>From a company memo some years ago: "PWT/FB re EIBT for FY 1980" John in Brisbane -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Bill Sent: Wednesday, 25 February 2015 6:18 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT more on Peter Lik On 24/02/2015 1:50 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > Well, we could get Mark on that "on line manual" and he could knock > off his naps to complete it. > Let us know what he says, Bill. Heh. The game was, of course, to see how many acronyms one could use in a sentence that still made some sense. bill -- 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
IBM were famous for that. They had a very big manual and rules about how you could form acronyms which included the strict injunction against nesting acronyms inside other acronyms. My favourite, possibly apocryphal, was AMD or Air Movement Device, otherwise known as a fan. A three letter acronym for a three letter word. And of course TLA (three letter acronym) itself. Paul Ewins Melbourne, Australia > On 25 Feb 2015, at 5:20 am, Bill wrote: > > On 24/02/2015 9:57 AM, Jack Davis wrote: >> In all likely hood, the explosion of acronyms would blow the mind. >> >> > The company I used to work for had enough acronyms that they ended up > publishing an online manual listing them and what they stood for. > It made for fun conversations. > > bill > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
That's exactly why we need Marks Anachronism Manual. Get him on that, Bill. Don't be a slacker. Jack - Original Message - From: "Bill" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 12:17:33 PM Subject: Re: OT more on Peter Lik On 24/02/2015 1:50 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > Well, we could get Mark on that "on line manual" and he could knock > off his naps to complete it. > Let us know what he says, Bill. Heh. The game was, of course, to see how many acronyms one could use in a sentence that still made some sense. bill -- 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
On 24/02/2015 1:50 PM, Jack Davis wrote: Well, we could get Mark on that "on line manual" and he could knock off his naps to complete it. Let us know what he says, Bill. Heh. The game was, of course, to see how many acronyms one could use in a sentence that still made some sense. bill -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
WTF for the posts where someone has seen some Art which they don't entirely understand. B > On 24 Feb 2015, at 15:40, Bruce Walker wrote: > > All I can figure so far is we need to institute another PDML > Subject-prefix to flag such posts, like "WIA" (what is art). We can > also add this to the FFH list (frequently flogged horses). > > >> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Jack Davis wrote: >> If you figure this all out, Bruce. Please let us know. :) >> >> Jack >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Malcolm Smith" >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" >> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:30:52 PM >> Subject: RE: OT more on Peter Lik >> >> Bruce Walker wrote: >> >>> So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so >>> much. >>> >>> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for- >>> success-sell-prints-print-money.html >> >> I quite like the image talked about here, although not for the sum involved. >> He thinks the sun brightly shines from his behind, but it's his marketing >> skills which impress me more than his art. >> >> I once walked past a London gallery that had a building skip outside, ready >> for collection. An eyesore on the street, but if it had been placed as a >> main exhibit within the gallery, no doubt some would have considered it art. >> What is art anyway; I'm in no position to judge as the parameters of >> definition seem as slippery as catching eels with greased rubber gloves. I'm >> fairly certain you don't improve art by simply raising the price tag - but >> then again... >> >> Malcolm >> >> >> -- >> 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. >> >> -- >> 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. > > > > -- > -bmw > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Well, we could get Mark on that "on line manual" and he could knock off his naps to complete it. Let us know what he says, Bill. Jack - Original Message - From: "Bill" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 10:20:15 AM Subject: Re: OT more on Peter Lik On 24/02/2015 9:57 AM, Jack Davis wrote: > In all likely hood, the explosion of acronyms would blow the mind. > > The company I used to work for had enough acronyms that they ended up publishing an online manual listing them and what they stood for. It made for fun conversations. bill -- 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Quoting Bill : On 24/02/2015 9:57 AM, Jack Davis wrote: In all likely hood, the explosion of acronyms would blow the mind. The company I used to work for had enough acronyms that they ended up publishing an online manual listing them and what they stood for. It made for fun conversations. Presumably that was called the AOM... -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
On 2/24/2015 8:55 AM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 2:30 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: I once walked past a London gallery that had a building skip outside, ready for collection. An eyesore on the street, but if it had been placed as a main exhibit within the gallery, no doubt some would have considered it art. What is "a building skip"? Dumpster - possibly the open top kind you find on construction sites. Most of what I say in my two ventures into the Tate Modern would make Peter Lik's work look artistic by contrast. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
On 24/02/2015 9:57 AM, Jack Davis wrote: In all likely hood, the explosion of acronyms would blow the mind. The company I used to work for had enough acronyms that they ended up publishing an online manual listing them and what they stood for. It made for fun conversations. bill -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > Here is a picture that looked pretty identical: > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/Skip_containing_rubbish_1 > 6s06.jpg It also looks a lot like some of what I saw in the Tate Modern . . . Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
In all likely hood, the explosion of acronyms would blow the mind. Jack - Original Message - From: "Bruce Walker" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 7:40:29 AM Subject: Re: OT more on Peter Lik All I can figure so far is we need to institute another PDML Subject-prefix to flag such posts, like "WIA" (what is art). We can also add this to the FFH list (frequently flogged horses). On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Jack Davis wrote: > If you figure this all out, Bruce. Please let us know. :) > > Jack > > - Original Message - > From: "Malcolm Smith" > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:30:52 PM > Subject: RE: OT more on Peter Lik > > Bruce Walker wrote: > >> So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so >> much. >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for- >> success-sell-prints-print-money.html > > I quite like the image talked about here, although not for the sum involved. > He thinks the sun brightly shines from his behind, but it's his marketing > skills which impress me more than his art. > > I once walked past a London gallery that had a building skip outside, ready > for collection. An eyesore on the street, but if it had been placed as a > main exhibit within the gallery, no doubt some would have considered it art. > What is art anyway; I'm in no position to judge as the parameters of > definition seem as slippery as catching eels with greased rubber gloves. I'm > fairly certain you don't improve art by simply raising the price tag - but > then again... > > Malcolm > > > -- > 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. > > -- > 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. -- -bmw -- 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
All I can figure so far is we need to institute another PDML Subject-prefix to flag such posts, like "WIA" (what is art). We can also add this to the FFH list (frequently flogged horses). On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Jack Davis wrote: > If you figure this all out, Bruce. Please let us know. :) > > Jack > > - Original Message - > From: "Malcolm Smith" > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:30:52 PM > Subject: RE: OT more on Peter Lik > > Bruce Walker wrote: > >> So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so >> much. >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for- >> success-sell-prints-print-money.html > > I quite like the image talked about here, although not for the sum involved. > He thinks the sun brightly shines from his behind, but it's his marketing > skills which impress me more than his art. > > I once walked past a London gallery that had a building skip outside, ready > for collection. An eyesore on the street, but if it had been placed as a > main exhibit within the gallery, no doubt some would have considered it art. > What is art anyway; I'm in no position to judge as the parameters of > definition seem as slippery as catching eels with greased rubber gloves. I'm > fairly certain you don't improve art by simply raising the price tag - but > then again... > > Malcolm > > > -- > 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. > > -- > 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. -- -bmw -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
If you figure this all out, Bruce. Please let us know. :) Jack - Original Message - From: "Malcolm Smith" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:30:52 PM Subject: RE: OT more on Peter Lik Bruce Walker wrote: > So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so > much. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for- > success-sell-prints-print-money.html I quite like the image talked about here, although not for the sum involved. He thinks the sun brightly shines from his behind, but it's his marketing skills which impress me more than his art. I once walked past a London gallery that had a building skip outside, ready for collection. An eyesore on the street, but if it had been placed as a main exhibit within the gallery, no doubt some would have considered it art. What is art anyway; I'm in no position to judge as the parameters of definition seem as slippery as catching eels with greased rubber gloves. I'm fairly certain you don't improve art by simply raising the price tag - but then again... Malcolm -- 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. -- 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.
RE: OT more on Peter Lik
Daniel J. Matyola wrote: > What is "a building skip"? > > Most of what I say in my two ventures into the Tate Modern would make > Peter Lik's work look artistic by contrast. A good question. It is really halfway between a wheeled dumpster and a truck roll off container for big house projects. Here is a picture that looked pretty identical: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/Skip_containing_rubbish_1 6s06.jpg Malcolm -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 2:30 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: > I once walked past a London gallery that had a building skip outside, ready > for collection. An eyesore on the street, but if it had been placed as a > main exhibit within the gallery, no doubt some would have considered it art. What is "a building skip"? Most of what I say in my two ventures into the Tate Modern would make Peter Lik's work look artistic by contrast. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- 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.
RE: OT more on Peter Lik
Bruce Walker wrote: > So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so > much. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for- > success-sell-prints-print-money.html I quite like the image talked about here, although not for the sum involved. He thinks the sun brightly shines from his behind, but it's his marketing skills which impress me more than his art. I once walked past a London gallery that had a building skip outside, ready for collection. An eyesore on the street, but if it had been placed as a main exhibit within the gallery, no doubt some would have considered it art. What is art anyway; I'm in no position to judge as the parameters of definition seem as slippery as catching eels with greased rubber gloves. I'm fairly certain you don't improve art by simply raising the price tag - but then again... Malcolm -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Bob W-PDML wrote: > You're confusing the art market with the art world EXACTLY! Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
P.J. Alling wrote: I don't think it's all shit, however when art is defined as anything the artist says it is, than everything and nothing is art. There are many reasons that I consider myself a photographer rather than an artist. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
I don't think it's all shit, however when art is defined as anything the artist says it is, than everything and nothing is art. I found it appalling that a 12x12 room filled a foot deep with Pennsylvania loam was art, about 20 years ago. It was valued at about a Million Dollars. You could visit it at a New York Gallery, only to peer at it through an open door. It wasn't even a good concept, but it got glowing reviews in the New York Times, and mentioned in the Smithsonian Magazine among other places. The word Art has ceased to have nay meaning, but if you can get someone to buy it there's a good living in it, for the Gallery owner if not the "Artist". On 2/23/2015 3:36 PM, Bob W-PDML wrote: You're confusing the art market with the art world, and people who buy and sell art with people who appreciate and enjoy it. There are vastly more people who appreciate it than who buy it. If you think it's all shit then that's ok, but if you can't defend the claim, then there's really no hope for you, no point in trying to discuss it with you, and really no point in you wasting your time emailing about it. B On 23 Feb 2015, at 20:04, P.J. Alling wrote: The art world is made up of people with more money than brains, or taste, and the con-men who bilk them, It's an entire ecosystem from produces of shit to purveyors of shit to consumers of shit. Lik has found out how to get the consumers of shit to consume his with out the help of the purveyor, that is what the art world finds distasteful about Peter Lik, He may also be shit, but that's not the issue. On 2/23/2015 2:42 PM, Bob W-PDML wrote: The art world doesn't have a high opinion of Lik. They think he's shit. And he is. B On 23 Feb 2015, at 18:41, John wrote: On 2/23/2015 3:16 AM, Bob W-PDML wrote: Like Lik and Vettriano and others, you seem to misunderstand fundamentally what matters to the art world. Rhine II is not supposed to be representative of what was in front of the camera. I understand exactly what matters to the "art world". I just don't share their high opinion for Lik et al. It always brings me back to that Dire Straits song "In the Gallery". -- - -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- 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. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
The buyer of Lik's magnum opus may not be as dumb as you think. I would be very surprised if there wasn't some kind of tax write-off scam involved that more than paid back the purchase price. On 2/23/2015 3:00 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: The art world is made up of people with more money than brains, or taste, and the con-men who bilk them, It's an entire ecosystem from produces of shit to purveyors of shit to consumers of shit. Lik has found out how to get the consumers of shit to consume his with out the help of the purveyor, that is what the art world finds distasteful about Peter Lik, He may also be shit, but that's not the issue. On 2/23/2015 2:42 PM, Bob W-PDML wrote: The art world doesn't have a high opinion of Lik. They think he's shit. And he is. B On 23 Feb 2015, at 18:41, John wrote: On 2/23/2015 3:16 AM, Bob W-PDML wrote: Like Lik and Vettriano and others, you seem to misunderstand fundamentally what matters to the art world. Rhine II is not supposed to be representative of what was in front of the camera. I understand exactly what matters to the "art world". I just don't share their high opinion for Lik et al. It always brings me back to that Dire Straits song "In the Gallery". -- - -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
On 2/23/2015 2:02 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: John wrote: On 2/23/2015 3:16 AM, Bob W-PDML wrote: Like Lik and Vettriano and others, you seem to misunderstand fundamentally what matters to the art world. Rhine II is not supposed to be representative of what was in front of the camera. I understand exactly what matters to the "art world". I just don't share their high opinion for Lik et al. It always brings me back to that Dire Straits song "In the Gallery". You seem to be under the misapprehension that the art world has a high opinion of Peter Lik. It doesn't, to put it mildly. You are in *agreement* with the "art world". So am I, come to think of it. I actually think the Lik image in question is a rather nice one. You can find many images similar to it on Flickr. What I don't agree with is that any print of that image is worth so many umpteen millions of dollars. If the "art world" does share my disdain for Mr. Lik, I still wouldn't say we are in agreement. -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
You're confusing the art market with the art world, and people who buy and sell art with people who appreciate and enjoy it. There are vastly more people who appreciate it than who buy it. If you think it's all shit then that's ok, but if you can't defend the claim, then there's really no hope for you, no point in trying to discuss it with you, and really no point in you wasting your time emailing about it. B > On 23 Feb 2015, at 20:04, P.J. Alling wrote: > > The art world is made up of people with more money than brains, or taste, and > the con-men who bilk them, It's an entire ecosystem from produces of shit to > purveyors of shit to consumers of shit. Lik has found out how to get the > consumers of shit to consume his with out the help of the purveyor, that is > what the art world finds distasteful about Peter Lik, He may also be shit, > but that's not the issue. > >> On 2/23/2015 2:42 PM, Bob W-PDML wrote: >> The art world doesn't have a high opinion of Lik. They think he's shit. And >> he is. >> >> B >> On 23 Feb 2015, at 18:41, John wrote: On 2/23/2015 3:16 AM, Bob W-PDML wrote: Like Lik and Vettriano and others, you seem to misunderstand fundamentally what matters to the art world. Rhine II is not supposed to be representative of what was in front of the camera. >>> I understand exactly what matters to the "art world". I just don't share >>> their high opinion for Lik et al. It always brings me back to that Dire >>> Straits song "In the Gallery". >>> >>> -- >>> - > > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- Woody Allen > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
The art world is made up of people with more money than brains, or taste, and the con-men who bilk them, It's an entire ecosystem from produces of shit to purveyors of shit to consumers of shit. Lik has found out how to get the consumers of shit to consume his with out the help of the purveyor, that is what the art world finds distasteful about Peter Lik, He may also be shit, but that's not the issue. On 2/23/2015 2:42 PM, Bob W-PDML wrote: The art world doesn't have a high opinion of Lik. They think he's shit. And he is. B On 23 Feb 2015, at 18:41, John wrote: On 2/23/2015 3:16 AM, Bob W-PDML wrote: Like Lik and Vettriano and others, you seem to misunderstand fundamentally what matters to the art world. Rhine II is not supposed to be representative of what was in front of the camera. I understand exactly what matters to the "art world". I just don't share their high opinion for Lik et al. It always brings me back to that Dire Straits song "In the Gallery". -- - -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Yes, I know what his question was. Photography as he describes it is not what matters to the art world. He's making a big mistake if he thinks it does. B > On 23 Feb 2015, at 10:32, Larry Colen wrote: > > I don't think his question was whether it was art, but whether it was > photography. Probably in much the same way was whether a collage that a > second grade makes of pictures cut from a magazine is photography. > >> On February 23, 2015 12:16:57 AM PST, Bob W-PDML >> wrote: >> The word is giclée and it's not made up, it's French. It means a jet of >> liquid which squirts out of something. It's also used of a burst of >> machine-gun fire. >> >> Like Lik and Vettriano and others, you seem to misunderstand >> fundamentally what matters to the art world. Rhine II is not supposed >> to be representative of what was in front of the camera. >> >> B >> >> >> >>> On 23 Feb 2015, at 02:26, P.J. Alling >> wrote: >>> >>> Oh, no I'm not saying that. I can't remember where I read this but >> there was an on line article about Rhine II showing the original scene. >> There wasn't just one ugly factory removed by Photoshopery, but the >> entire horizon of ugly factories was removed. When I say heavily >> Photoshopped I mean it, when that much retouching is involved, you're >> no longer working with a photograph per se, but some other kind of >> digital artwork. I've removed entire tourists from images I've shown, >> the difference being that I didn't fundamentally change the actual >> scene, just a movable element that moved into frame that I didn't >> notice. The only way the scene that Rhine II is supposed to represent, >> could exist, would be with judicious applications of high explosives >> and heavy machinery to remove the debris. >>> >>> Gileec is a made up word to give inkjet images the imprimatur of an >> Art technique as calling them inkjet images simply confuses the rubes >> or is it the other way around... >>> >>> I remember the first time I was asked if one of my exhibited images >> was a Giléec*, at the time I didn't honestly know... >>> >>> *Strangely the first e is supposed to have an acute accent over it >> but the Windows Character Map utility doesn't seem to have that >> character I had to steal it from Wikapedia and it may not display >> properly on other peoples systems... >>> >>> >>> On 2/22/2015 7:59 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: Not that I disagree with the bulk of your sentiments here -- I said much the same to my wife at dinner about admiring the guy's >> marketing skills -- but you appear to be stating that "photographs" >> effectively cease to exist once chemicals and negatives are out of the loop. An idea I vehemently disagree with. DSLRs, software and inkjet prints are all part of the new photograpy and thus produce photographs. > On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 6:52 PM, P.J. Alling >> wrote: > The quote from the London Gallery owner is pretty telling, not so >> much about > Lik, but certianly about the Art photography marked. Let's see, >> Rhine II, > wasn't exactly a photograph, it was a heavily Photoshopped inkjet, >> (Oh, I'm > sorry, perhaps I should have used the word Gilcee instead of >> inkjet), print. > Yet I'll bet that gallery owner didn't blink an eye when it sold >> for $1.3 > million. From what I've seen of Lik's work it doesn't require eye >> bleach, > (such as Thomas Kinkade's did). It just seems that he's found a >> way to > legally separate money from rich people with more money than brains >> without > needing a middle man. More power to him I say. > > >> On 2/22/2015 4:39 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: >> So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so >> much. >> >> >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html >> > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to >> achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- Woody Allen > > > > -- > 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. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to >> achieve immortality through not dying. >>> -- Woody Allen >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >> -- >> 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. > > -- > Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
John wrote: >On 2/23/2015 3:16 AM, Bob W-PDML wrote: > >> Like Lik and Vettriano and others, you seem to misunderstand >> fundamentally what matters to the art world. Rhine II is not supposed >> to be representative of what was in front of the camera. > >I understand exactly what matters to the "art world". I just don't share >their high opinion for Lik et al. It always brings me back to that Dire >Straits song "In the Gallery". You seem to be under the misapprehension that the art world has a high opinion of Peter Lik. It doesn't, to put it mildly. You are in *agreement* with the "art world". So am I, come to think of it. -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Yeah, Peter and Ken are quite "unique", thankfully! Jack - Original Message - From: "Brian Walters" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2015 10:17:00 PM Subject: Re: OT more on Peter Lik Quoting John : > Sounds to me like he thinks he's Ken Rockwell. I think Rockwell would love to be Peter Lik, then he could stop expecting visitors to his website to pay $5 for the 'privilege' of printing out one of his articles. -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
I don't think his question was whether it was art, but whether it was photography. Probably in much the same way was whether a collage that a second grade makes of pictures cut from a magazine is photography. On February 23, 2015 12:16:57 AM PST, Bob W-PDML wrote: >The word is giclée and it's not made up, it's French. It means a jet of >liquid which squirts out of something. It's also used of a burst of >machine-gun fire. > >Like Lik and Vettriano and others, you seem to misunderstand >fundamentally what matters to the art world. Rhine II is not supposed >to be representative of what was in front of the camera. > >B > > > >> On 23 Feb 2015, at 02:26, P.J. Alling >wrote: >> >> Oh, no I'm not saying that. I can't remember where I read this but >there was an on line article about Rhine II showing the original scene. >There wasn't just one ugly factory removed by Photoshopery, but the >entire horizon of ugly factories was removed. When I say heavily >Photoshopped I mean it, when that much retouching is involved, you're >no longer working with a photograph per se, but some other kind of >digital artwork. I've removed entire tourists from images I've shown, >the difference being that I didn't fundamentally change the actual >scene, just a movable element that moved into frame that I didn't >notice. The only way the scene that Rhine II is supposed to represent, >could exist, would be with judicious applications of high explosives >and heavy machinery to remove the debris. >> >> Gileec is a made up word to give inkjet images the imprimatur of an >Art technique as calling them inkjet images simply confuses the rubes >or is it the other way around... >> >> I remember the first time I was asked if one of my exhibited images >was a Giléec*, at the time I didn't honestly know... >> >> *Strangely the first e is supposed to have an acute accent over it >but the Windows Character Map utility doesn't seem to have that >character I had to steal it from Wikapedia and it may not display >properly on other peoples systems... >> >> >> >>> On 2/22/2015 7:59 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: >>> Not that I disagree with the bulk of your sentiments here -- I said >>> much the same to my wife at dinner about admiring the guy's >marketing >>> skills -- but you appear to be stating that "photographs" >effectively >>> cease to exist once chemicals and negatives are out of the loop. An >>> idea I vehemently disagree with. >>> >>> DSLRs, software and inkjet prints are all part of the new photograpy >>> and thus produce photographs. >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 6:52 PM, P.J. Alling > wrote: The quote from the London Gallery owner is pretty telling, not so >much about Lik, but certianly about the Art photography marked. Let's see, >Rhine II, wasn't exactly a photograph, it was a heavily Photoshopped inkjet, >(Oh, I'm sorry, perhaps I should have used the word Gilcee instead of >inkjet), print. Yet I'll bet that gallery owner didn't blink an eye when it sold >for $1.3 million. From what I've seen of Lik's work it doesn't require eye >bleach, (such as Thomas Kinkade's did). It just seems that he's found a >way to legally separate money from rich people with more money than brains >without needing a middle man. More power to him I say. > On 2/22/2015 4:39 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: > So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so >much. > > > >http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html > -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to >achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- 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. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to >achieve immortality through not dying. >> -- Woody Allen >> >> >> -- >> 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. >-- >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. -- Sent from my Android phone 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
The word is giclée and it's not made up, it's French. It means a jet of liquid which squirts out of something. It's also used of a burst of machine-gun fire. Like Lik and Vettriano and others, you seem to misunderstand fundamentally what matters to the art world. Rhine II is not supposed to be representative of what was in front of the camera. B > On 23 Feb 2015, at 02:26, P.J. Alling wrote: > > Oh, no I'm not saying that. I can't remember where I read this but there was > an on line article about Rhine II showing the original scene. There wasn't > just one ugly factory removed by Photoshopery, but the entire horizon of ugly > factories was removed. When I say heavily Photoshopped I mean it, when that > much retouching is involved, you're no longer working with a photograph per > se, but some other kind of digital artwork. I've removed entire tourists from > images I've shown, the difference being that I didn't fundamentally change > the actual scene, just a movable element that moved into frame that I didn't > notice. The only way the scene that Rhine II is supposed to represent, could > exist, would be with judicious applications of high explosives and heavy > machinery to remove the debris. > > Gileec is a made up word to give inkjet images the imprimatur of an Art > technique as calling them inkjet images simply confuses the rubes or is it > the other way around... > > I remember the first time I was asked if one of my exhibited images was a > Giléec*, at the time I didn't honestly know... > > *Strangely the first e is supposed to have an acute accent over it but the > Windows Character Map utility doesn't seem to have that character I had to > steal it from Wikapedia and it may not display properly on other peoples > systems... > > > >> On 2/22/2015 7:59 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: >> Not that I disagree with the bulk of your sentiments here -- I said >> much the same to my wife at dinner about admiring the guy's marketing >> skills -- but you appear to be stating that "photographs" effectively >> cease to exist once chemicals and negatives are out of the loop. An >> idea I vehemently disagree with. >> >> DSLRs, software and inkjet prints are all part of the new photograpy >> and thus produce photographs. >> >> >>> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 6:52 PM, P.J. Alling >>> wrote: >>> The quote from the London Gallery owner is pretty telling, not so much about >>> Lik, but certianly about the Art photography marked. Let's see, Rhine II, >>> wasn't exactly a photograph, it was a heavily Photoshopped inkjet, (Oh, I'm >>> sorry, perhaps I should have used the word Gilcee instead of inkjet), print. >>> Yet I'll bet that gallery owner didn't blink an eye when it sold for $1.3 >>> million. From what I've seen of Lik's work it doesn't require eye bleach, >>> (such as Thomas Kinkade's did). It just seems that he's found a way to >>> legally separate money from rich people with more money than brains without >>> needing a middle man. More power to him I say. >>> >>> On 2/22/2015 4:39 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so much. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html >>> >>> -- >>> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve >>> immortality through not dying. >>> -- Woody Allen >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >> >> > > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- Woody Allen > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
It's completely irrelevant in the context of the art world whether he used Photoshop or not, or what media it's printed on or what type of camera he used, and none of that has any bearing at all on prices. B > On 23 Feb 2015, at 00:59, Bruce Walker wrote: > > Not that I disagree with the bulk of your sentiments here -- I said > much the same to my wife at dinner about admiring the guy's marketing > skills -- but you appear to be stating that "photographs" effectively > cease to exist once chemicals and negatives are out of the loop. An > idea I vehemently disagree with. > > DSLRs, software and inkjet prints are all part of the new photograpy > and thus produce photographs. > > >> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 6:52 PM, P.J. Alling >> wrote: >> The quote from the London Gallery owner is pretty telling, not so much about >> Lik, but certianly about the Art photography marked. Let's see, Rhine II, >> wasn't exactly a photograph, it was a heavily Photoshopped inkjet, (Oh, I'm >> sorry, perhaps I should have used the word Gilcee instead of inkjet), print. >> Yet I'll bet that gallery owner didn't blink an eye when it sold for $1.3 >> million. From what I've seen of Lik's work it doesn't require eye bleach, >> (such as Thomas Kinkade's did). It just seems that he's found a way to >> legally separate money from rich people with more money than brains without >> needing a middle man. More power to him I say. >> >> >>> On 2/22/2015 4:39 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: >>> >>> So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so much. >>> >>> >>> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html >>> >> >> >> -- >> I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve >> immortality through not dying. >> -- Woody Allen >> >> >> >> -- >> 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. > > > > -- > -bmw > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Quoting John : Sounds to me like he thinks he's Ken Rockwell. I think Rockwell would love to be Peter Lik, then he could stop expecting visitors to his website to pay $5 for the 'privilege' of printing out one of his articles. -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Took me a second to remember him, but I think he's that English "painter" who did the one about couple dancing in the rain on the beach at Brighton while their servants hold umbrella's for them. You often see reproductions of the painting in the kind of "art" gallery where they'll tell you that photography is NOT art. http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/07/jack-vettriano-singing-butler-art On 2/22/2015 6:26 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Now I have to google Jack Vettriano... ann On 2/22/2015 16:56, Bob W-PDML wrote: That's an interesting article. He sounds like a photography version of Jack Vettriano. B On 22 Feb 2015, at 21:39, Bruce Walker wrote: So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so much. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html -- -bmw -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Sounds to me like he thinks he's Ken Rockwell. On 2/22/2015 4:56 PM, Bob W-PDML wrote: That's an interesting article. He sounds like a photography version of Jack Vettriano. B On 22 Feb 2015, at 21:39, Bruce Walker wrote: So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so much. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html -- -bmw -- Science - Questions we may never find answers for. Religion - Answers we must never question. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Oh, no I'm not saying that. I can't remember where I read this but there was an on line article about Rhine II showing the original scene. There wasn't just one ugly factory removed by Photoshopery, but the entire horizon of ugly factories was removed. When I say heavily Photoshopped I mean it, when that much retouching is involved, you're no longer working with a photograph per se, but some other kind of digital artwork. I've removed entire tourists from images I've shown, the difference being that I didn't fundamentally change the actual scene, just a movable element that moved into frame that I didn't notice. The only way the scene that Rhine II is supposed to represent, could exist, would be with judicious applications of high explosives and heavy machinery to remove the debris. Gileec is a made up word to give inkjet images the imprimatur of an Art technique as calling them inkjet images simply confuses the rubes or is it the other way around... I remember the first time I was asked if one of my exhibited images was a Giléec*, at the time I didn't honestly know... *Strangely the first e is supposed to have an acute accent over it but the Windows Character Map utility doesn't seem to have that character I had to steal it from Wikapedia and it may not display properly on other peoples systems... On 2/22/2015 7:59 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: Not that I disagree with the bulk of your sentiments here -- I said much the same to my wife at dinner about admiring the guy's marketing skills -- but you appear to be stating that "photographs" effectively cease to exist once chemicals and negatives are out of the loop. An idea I vehemently disagree with. DSLRs, software and inkjet prints are all part of the new photograpy and thus produce photographs. On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 6:52 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: The quote from the London Gallery owner is pretty telling, not so much about Lik, but certianly about the Art photography marked. Let's see, Rhine II, wasn't exactly a photograph, it was a heavily Photoshopped inkjet, (Oh, I'm sorry, perhaps I should have used the word Gilcee instead of inkjet), print. Yet I'll bet that gallery owner didn't blink an eye when it sold for $1.3 million. From what I've seen of Lik's work it doesn't require eye bleach, (such as Thomas Kinkade's did). It just seems that he's found a way to legally separate money from rich people with more money than brains without needing a middle man. More power to him I say. On 2/22/2015 4:39 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so much. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- 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. -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Not that I disagree with the bulk of your sentiments here -- I said much the same to my wife at dinner about admiring the guy's marketing skills -- but you appear to be stating that "photographs" effectively cease to exist once chemicals and negatives are out of the loop. An idea I vehemently disagree with. DSLRs, software and inkjet prints are all part of the new photograpy and thus produce photographs. On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 6:52 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: > The quote from the London Gallery owner is pretty telling, not so much about > Lik, but certianly about the Art photography marked. Let's see, Rhine II, > wasn't exactly a photograph, it was a heavily Photoshopped inkjet, (Oh, I'm > sorry, perhaps I should have used the word Gilcee instead of inkjet), print. > Yet I'll bet that gallery owner didn't blink an eye when it sold for $1.3 > million. From what I've seen of Lik's work it doesn't require eye bleach, > (such as Thomas Kinkade's did). It just seems that he's found a way to > legally separate money from rich people with more money than brains without > needing a middle man. More power to him I say. > > > On 2/22/2015 4:39 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: >> >> So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so much. >> >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html >> > > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- Woody Allen > > > > -- > 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. -- -bmw -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
The quote from the London Gallery owner is pretty telling, not so much about Lik, but certianly about the Art photography marked. Let's see, Rhine II, wasn't exactly a photograph, it was a heavily Photoshopped inkjet, (Oh, I'm sorry, perhaps I should have used the word Gilcee instead of inkjet), print. Yet I'll bet that gallery owner didn't blink an eye when it sold for $1.3 million. From what I've seen of Lik's work it doesn't require eye bleach, (such as Thomas Kinkade's did). It just seems that he's found a way to legally separate money from rich people with more money than brains without needing a middle man. More power to him I say. On 2/22/2015 4:39 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so much. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html -- I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
Now I have to google Jack Vettriano... ann On 2/22/2015 16:56, Bob W-PDML wrote: That's an interesting article. He sounds like a photography version of Jack Vettriano. B On 22 Feb 2015, at 21:39, Bruce Walker wrote: So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so much. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html -- -bmw -- 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. -- 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.
Re: OT more on Peter Lik
That's an interesting article. He sounds like a photography version of Jack Vettriano. B > On 22 Feb 2015, at 21:39, Bruce Walker wrote: > > So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so much. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html > > -- > -bmw > > -- > 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. -- 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.
OT more on Peter Lik
So is Lik's work resellable for a lot of money? Apparently, not so much. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/business/peter-liks-recipe-for-success-sell-prints-print-money.html -- -bmw -- 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.
