The Richest Photographer In the World

I for sure agree he is a fraud but as always:
"Art is what you can get away with" [Andy Warhol]

If that guy finds an audience willing and able to pay a million bucks for stolen photographs just slightly modified or just commented on then Price obviously got lucky. Anyone is free to use the same method... you just need to team up with a well known gallery owner and work the market:rolleyes:.
 
Surprised Leo Brunett or Phillip Morris didn't sue his a** off for the Marlboro rip off. That's blatant and most of the Marlboro ads are composites of many photos put together either by hand (the old way) or with Photoshop. Leo Burnett had Photoshop in CMYK before anyone else in the world. They were alpha site.

Those were the days.
 
Huss said:
If your kid cheated in an exam by copying off someone else's work, how would you view him?
Click to expand...

Did the kid change a few answers? ;)

I would argue that Prince's Art isn't Photography at all but is Conceptual Art. The majority of the photography he uses isn't great photography (well, generally speaking) that would sell on its own in a gallery setting.
 
photomoof said:
Go for it. :)



I seriously doubt his is work being purchased by the "celebrities" of the world, not really how that market appears to be operating? Granted they are at the Museum Galas of the world, but probably not with their wallets open?
Click to expand...

I stand corrected. The article only mentions Jay Z, Robert De Niro, and Brad Pitt attending his openings. It's unclear if they bought anything. However, my statement stands. These "celebrities" can't respect copyright so why should they demand the rest of us to respect it in regard to the their artistic endeavours.
 
codester80 said:
Should photograph his stuff and give it away for free. I bet his attitude toward copyright would change. As for the celebrities buying his crap, I say screw them when they bitch about people pirating their music, movies, etc. If they can't support other artists copyright, why should we support theirs.
Click to expand...

I read an article a few months ago about a photographer who's work was stolen making copies like Prince's and selling them for $90.

But then the collector would not have the same experience of going to the gallery, knowing they purchased an original Prince, and parting with all that money.

Edit- found a reference to the story..

http://petapixel.com/2015/05/28/richard-prince-victim-responds-by-selling-his-90000-artwork-for-90/
 
I find it endlessly fascinating that in others areas of the arts - for instance, music - you cannot do something similar to what this guy is doing, unless you want to get sued.

A case in point is the song "Surfin' USA", in which Brian Wilson "appropriated" the music and melody of "Maybelline" by Chuck Berry, and completely changed the words. Wilson did not get to claim anything near "tranformative" and ended up having to settle with Berry (or his song publisher). I see no difference between this and "transforming" photos. People (and the courts) seem to have a much higher regard for music (and other arts) than photography.
 
jpa66 said:
I find it endlessly fascinating that in others areas of the arts - for instance, music - you cannot do something similar to what this guy is doing, unless you want to get sued.
Click to expand...

Music is a commercial art form... company advertisements (another commercial art) can't appropriate photos as easily (or as cheaply) as artists can.
 
Fraud in art... This morning I had a song running through my head that gradually clarified itself as Anne Murray's "Snowbird" from the 1970's. I looked up the lyrics to refresh my memory further and came across this reference at http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=2319

"This song was part of a major plot line in a 2013 episode of The Family Guy. Stewie and Brian become obsessed with Ms. Murray's music, and after debating the meaning of Snowbird, decide to ask Ms. Murray directly. She generally affirms both their interpretations, but also notes that she didn't write the song (or any of her own songs). Stewie immediately deems her a 'fraud' and..." "...he forces her to perform it at gunpoint while bound and gagged."

So that's how to deal with fraud in the arts? :D
 
Sure, get a dog...whatever makes you happy...as long as it helps you from being stupid vis-a-vis modern art. If the dog doesn't work, get a hamster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom