Hi Rachel,Originally Posted by Clicker
Thanks for your comments! They are appreciated.
While I understand while you may consider the second one more arty. I disagree with your comments on the first image.
Why? There is a lot more going on in the first image than the second. I'm sorry you only see a pretty girl and not the "arty" lighting side of the image.
Unfortunately for a lot of us, I see where the "art as photography" is going. A beatiful landscape isn't good enough unless it's turned into some photoshop concoction. Then it becomes art. A beatiful women isn't arty because that's what you see in "mens" magazines. And, this makes it not arty.
Mike
PS: Again, I think people need to extrapolate images to actual printed images. Thus, they'll realize for a 400x600 to be appealling it must be oversimplified. Go to an art museum and you'll see many, if not most, of the painting would appear cluttered at 400x600.



LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote