Overrated photographers...

zumbido said:
To anyone with a grasp of reality, no, that is not what I'm saying. Nobody will pay for your photo because it has a light pole in it. People will pay for your photo because it has the Golden Gate Bridge in it. What gives you the right to make money off something that you don't own?
Click to expand...

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?
 
Peter R said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Ranchu said:
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.
Click to expand...

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:
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:
PKR said:
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.
Click to expand...

Debatable. What's needed is a public works program, but not limited to government functionaries and financial parasites which is what they're doing. I imagine the same thing happened last time, for as long as they could manage it. WPA II anybody?
 
Ranchu said:
Debatable. What's needed is a public works program, but not limited to government functionaries and financial parasites which is what they're doing. I imagine the same thing happened last time, for as long as they could manage it. WPA II anybody?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Ranchu said:
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.
Click to expand...

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:
PKR said:
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.
Click to expand...

Guess we'll see.
 
PKR said:
... banksters ....
Click to expand...

Wow. As contemporary terms, this may be a viral one. I plan on using it in context by tomorrow. I'd ask that everyone else reading this does the same. Such a campaign may bring those who coast to riches on our backs be recognized for who and what they are. Banksters indeed!
 
Peter R said:
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).
Click to expand...

Cheers mate!
 
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.
 
javimm said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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 said:
Hipsters.

Yep, the whole army. They only take pictures of themselves, great pictures but ever so slightly repetitive.
Click to expand...

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:
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:
 
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:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom