Peter R
Established
I'm Australian, so correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the Golden Gate bridge owned by the government, and in that case, don't citizens 'own' it?
Ranchu
Veteran
No, our government is owned by corporations who fund our politicians, who in turn serve the interests of those corporations. We rabble are manipulated by a constant barrage of left-right propaganda that works very well to distract a large proportion of us from the scam. Works well if you're a corporation, politician, or bureaucrat. Otherwise not so much.
PKR
Veteran
Peter R.;
One would think so, but these days we work for the Govt. rather than the other way around. Ain't it great.. The tax holiday is now in August. Ranchu is correct and it's all about lobbyists and what they want.
Last edited:
PKR
Veteran
All bridges in the State of California are run by Caltrans, except the Golden Gate Bridge. It is run by the GG bridge district. It is said to be separate from the city and county of sf. But, the board of directors for the district is made up of SF city officials. I'm sure you can figure out the outcome this kind of situation. The City of SF is in need of a lot of money. They won't quit spending in a bad economy.. The same for the bridge district. It's insane.
Last edited:
Ranchu
Veteran
PKR
Veteran
They produced some nice art work that remains intact here. I have the feeling you and I are of the few who see the on going scam. It won't end until the wall st boys and banksters have moved as much $$ out of here as they can.
Peter R
Established
To be honest, the idea that government built structures would be owned by the taxpayers is something I came to from what you might call a left-wing perspective (judging by your post)? (EDIT: whoa, sorry, I misread your post: left/right... not left wing... changes everything... I'll scrap what I said as I basically agree with you).
Last edited:
Ranchu
Veteran
Chris101
summicronia
Ranchu
Veteran
Cheers mate!
PKR
Veteran
I can't take credit for the term "Banksters" It's been in use here, for a few months. yes propagate it..
javimm
Established
I haven't read all the 12 pages of this thread, just a few on the first and last...
Well, the most overrated photographer IMO is Man Ray. I've seen his pics in many exhibitions. All pictures I've seen from him are tiny prints, more like a contact print, with no significant content as I see them. I suppose that in the surrealism group he was involved, his photography had some meaning for that time period, but I don't see his "art".
On the other hand, I love HCB and Salgado. And Ansel Adams too. He was a master of printing and developing. His prints have an amazing tonal range and quality.
Well, the most overrated photographer IMO is Man Ray. I've seen his pics in many exhibitions. All pictures I've seen from him are tiny prints, more like a contact print, with no significant content as I see them. I suppose that in the surrealism group he was involved, his photography had some meaning for that time period, but I don't see his "art".
On the other hand, I love HCB and Salgado. And Ansel Adams too. He was a master of printing and developing. His prints have an amazing tonal range and quality.
PKR
Veteran
There were a bunch of artists who used the photographic media as a canvas for their art. They may not be "photographers' in the traditional sense.. but, just the same, it's photographic art. I agree with you, but his stuff is fun to look at.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
Which photographer is overrated? This question is a bit redundant isn't it? If you can name the photographer then s/he has attained some notoriety. Surely s/he does not deserve it and thus is overrated. Is that the logic? It is really only photography, not anything requires talent like basket weaving, a mere craft like the one practiced by A.A., or a mere job, like the one practiced by A.L., or a rich man's hobby like HCB, or glorified wedding photography like most portrait "artists", or porno like that Mappledork.
Neare
Well-known
Hipsters.
Yep, the whole army. They only take pictures of themselves, great pictures but ever so slightly repetitive.
Yep, the whole army. They only take pictures of themselves, great pictures but ever so slightly repetitive.
mrisney
Well-known
Terry Richardson, I was about to add Juergen Teller. But I think he was slightly more original than Terry Richardson. Plus I do like a photographer who shoots with a Contax G2. I could add Richard Kern. Ryan McGinley ? Maybe, seems like inspiration for the army of hipsters that are shooting with vintage 35mm film SLR's - going for the sunburst, grainy look. I do like him, but I think he has been over rewarded as the next big thing. I think he's retreading. Somewhere in this vein, lies Larry Clark, and he could definitely be taken down a few notches.
Last edited:
robklurfield
eclipse
Uncle Earl.
Andy Kibber
Well-known
To the folks replying to the OP's question on this page:
Quit trying to drag this thread back on topic! Everyone knows it should be about bridges, police salaries, banksters, etc.
:bang:
Quit trying to drag this thread back on topic! Everyone knows it should be about bridges, police salaries, banksters, etc.
:bang:
x-ray
Veteran
David Hilliard and Shelby Lee Adams. There's nothing special about Hilliard's work either technically or esthetically. His subjects are totally boring and ordinary. Shelby's work is an insult to the people he photographs. It's contrived and dishonest.
Last edited:
panchro-press
Member
Frankly, this thread clearly shows it to be a Falange plot aimed at causing unrest in the Republic.
Beware the Falange!
Dave
Beware the Falange!
Dave