second life photography discussion

[Rolig Loon]

 

28 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

The vast majority of "modern art" IS pseudo-intellectual drek, by zero talent parasites counting on self-proclaimed "art experts" to "interpret" deep meaning into the drek and heap undeserved praise on it as their contribution to the investment scam parasite industry that is "High Brow Modern Art Appreciation".

Everyone has a different idea about what "good" art looks like. Sometimes it's good because it is a well-executed representation of a natural object or a scene. Sometimes it evokes a memory of a meaningful event or person. Sometimes it makes you uneasy about conflicting values or cultural assumptions. Sometimes, it just makes you laugh because it reminds you of how silly the world can be.

I'm sure that the jumble of broken glass that I referred to here yesterday made some viewers reflect on man's inhumanity to man or the implicit fragility of beauty, even though it looked like broken glass to me. I find it hard to believe that anyone can find deep meaning or emotional response from a banana nailed to the wall, but obviously some people do. Some people probably find polished concrete reproductions of pebbles inspiring too. It boggles my mind, but then so does a lot of what other people enjoy, from pineapple pizza to K-Pop. One man's epiphany is another man's drek.  💖💩

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 hour ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

There is a piece of "modern art" in a city in England, the "artist" picked a 4 inch long pebble of a beach, sent to some company with a 3d scaling pantograph cutter, who made a flimsy copy, 4 feet long, that got sent to a concrete casting firm, who made a polished concrete version, that sold as "modern art" to a city council for about $75,000 tax dollars, from the kind of people who hate so-called "modern art".

There's an "artist" who bought a cheap tent, used it to attend rock festivals for several years, getting drunk, stoned, and laid in it. When it wore out, she wrote the names of all the guys who had banged her, on strips of paper, safety pinned these to the inside of the tent, put it up in an art gallery and asked more than $50,000 for it.

The vast majority of "modern art" IS pseudo-intellectual drek, by zero talent parasites counting on self-proclaimed "art experts" to "interpret" deep meaning into the drek and heap undeserved praise on it as their contribution to the investment scam parasite industry that is "High Brow Modern Art Appreciation".

 

You're right, this does exclude ripping off wealthy, pretentious snobs, as does avoiding Fake Money Crypto-Crap Not Effing True Financial Fraud Scam Tokens backed by Blag-Chain, an industry that is marginally more honest than "modern art".

I'm not sure what you think that cherry-picking a small handful -- or, for that matter 10, or 50, or 500 -- examples of egregiously silly "modern art" proves, exactly.

I can't judge these -- I'd want to know more about them and, most especially, actually see and experience them. Judging visual art on the basis of a brief (and frankly biased) verbal description is not really a good procedure. Would you judge the excellence of Michaelangelo's David merely on the basis of a description?

It's also, I think, silly to dismiss an entire era of art based solely on your feelings about a handful of pieces -- regardless of how good or awful they are.

Equally, I am not, as I said somewhere above, calling for a blanket acceptance that all modern art is "good," or indeed even that everything that calls itself "art" is, in fact, "art." That too would be silly, and was not what I was arguing.

I think that good art criticism judges each work on its individual merits, possibly connecting it to other contemporary works or "schools," but never simply blandly and uncritically approving or disapproving of a work.

Edited March 10, 2023 by Scylla Rhiadra
Missing words

[Rowan Amore]

There's also a distinction between Modern art (which I generally like) and contemporary art (the banana on the wall).  

A key distinction between modern and contemporary art was a shift in focus away from aesthetic beauty to the underlying concept of the work (conceptual art and performance art are good examples).

 

[Ayashe Ninetails]

22 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

There's also a distinction between Modern art (which I generally like) and contemporary art (the banana on the wall).  

A key distinction between modern and contemporary art was a shift in focus away from aesthetic beauty to the underlying concept of the work (conceptual art and performance art are good examples).

 

Yup. Also, Modern Art ended in the 1970s, give or take.

[Love Zhaoying]

55 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

Everyone has a different idea about what "good" art looks like.

Refrigerator-hung art by toddlers is the gooder art!

ChatGPT art is not gooder. To paraphrase George Orwell, is "double-plus ungood".

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/double-plus-ungood

Edited March 10, 2023 by Love Zhaoying
Watch me get a lecture on George Orwell now, from a teacher.

[Rolig Loon]

11 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Refrigerator-hung art by toddlers is the gooder art!

MY grandkids' refrigerator art is superb!

[Love Zhaoying]

7 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

MY grandkids' refrigerator art is superb!

Foil gold stars!!

[Love Zhaoying]

How could I forget about MOBA?!

https://museumofbadart.org/

[Dafadilia Wayfarer]

I've been taking photos in SL since 2010. A year after I joined SL. I've never taken them in the hopes they would get tons of attention. I don't edit my photos besides using tools within SL, cropping a photo here and there that needs it and maybe using a filter when I feel it fits. I'm certainly not an expert. Photos in SL for me are a story waiting to be told. I'm an avid roleplayer, writer and blogger. I love telling a story. Mostly of elves, dragons, fairies, etc. That kind of thing. The characters I create come to life through photos. For me...

I post on flickr and I will sometimes share here on the forums. The funny thing is I'm very shy and timid. I'm not outgoing at all and the one reason I began to share my photos on the two platforms was to break the cycle of being afraid to be seen. I still get a lump in my throat and my heart speeds up even before I click the upload button, but I do it because it is breaking the anxiety cycle I have just a bit. The more anxious I'm feeling, the more I push myself to share (Within the forum rules and rules of each flickr group of course). I know it sounds odd, but it is my own personal exercise so I can be more open with others.

People take photos in SL for many different purposes. Some of us simply love putting together a look, atmosphere and mood that reveals a story. I love taking photos and I'm completely alright I'm not the best at it. I do what I enjoy. Do your photography for yourself. I blog and take photos about things that interest me. Sometimes my blog posts help others find things they were searching for in regards to roleplay and I love that. The flickr popularity clique shouldn't really be an aspiration for anyone. That's my personal view though so take it with a grain of salt of course.

Do and share what makes you happy as long as it isn't hurting anyone in the process. I just feel that hobbies and interests should never be about a popularity contest, but the joy it brings.