APW - Beauty In Bed (slight NSFW) (1773 hits)
Category: GraphicsRating: 1.41 on 38 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by kaos-king (antius777) (View user info) at 2007-06-13 03:23:21 EDT
I collect jpg images obssesively because I never know when I'll be able to use them in a post.
I have tens of thousands, all organized. It's all really quite ridiculous.
Anyhow, here are a bunch from bedrooms...
User Reviews
Submitted by Ltap (user info) at 2007-12-05 11:33:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
+2 for the great photos.
And photography can be a skill or a talent. Like photos of forensic evidence, that's a skill - you use lighting and angle to help get a clear picture. Talented photography is more about capturing the essence of something, which makes you feel that you're there in person instead of just looking at a picture.
Submitted by iddqd (user info) at 2007-06-14 21:40:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2007-06-13 13:46:25 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by iddqd (user info) at 2007-06-13 03:44:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
photography is not art. photography is a skill.
---
wrong.
a lot of people say this, and these are people who have no idea the things they can create using the camera tool to its fullest extent in combination with their own imaginations. they tend to think of the camera as a simple tool for capturing image, with there being very little valuable input from the photographer.
the guy who takes class photos to sell to proud parents is utilising a 'skill'.
Ansel Adams, Diane Arbus...people of this stripe utilised talents, through a tool, to create art. they are artists.
photography is 'only' a skill when that is as far as one can progress with it.
is being able to crank out an enjoyable story or poem an art or a skill? you are after all only using the handy and readily available to anyone tools of grammar and language.
is cranking out Bob Ross style paintings an art or a skill? i mean, painters are commonly seen as being artists...but these people are following a simple set of instructions and base techniques to make these things. really not much moire involved than in a paint by numbers.
this statement of yours, iddqd, is really a lot more narrow and closeminded than I think you tend to be.
----
i think this is abuot as good an answer to my statement as i could ever get, and im afraid its still nowhere near close to convincing me. this isnt just because m an egotistical prick who cant accept being wrong or another persons point of view, lest it break my fragile little soul, but because i genuinely think that photography is not art.
the word you used in the first sentence is the key: imagination. i do not, nor ever will beleive photgraphy requires imagination. certainly language is a tool, as are brush and paints - every bit as much a tool as a camera. however to write someting down one has to concieve of it entirely in their heads (this is from an artistic standpoint), the imagination is everything. to use a camera requires no imagination beyond seeing something pretty/disturbing/interesting/pedestrian and playing with some switches then taking about a MILLION photos and picking the ones that look the best. certainly some skills are involved, but i honestly believe there is little ot no imagination needed to be an 'artistic' photographer.
i had a whole lot more i typed, but deleted as it wasnt particularly useful, and was confusing myself with russian formalism and points about personal preference, which are both irrelevant. also, itll pay off for you to not assume i am being closeminded, as i very rarely am if ever, unless it is absolutely on purpose and consciously.
Submitted by Orgasmatron (user info) at 2007-06-14 16:43:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No, thank YOU good sir.
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2007-06-14 16:23:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
i can dig that.
the 'White Trash' thing was a little far fetched I'll admit. in that guy's defense, he has put together some works of sculpture that were very thoughtful.
i really have no time to keep this up today, as i have done little work in my humble office.
hmmm, this has been the nicest discussion I have had on uber in months. Thanks for that.
Submitted by Orgasmatron (user info) at 2007-06-14 15:50:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
It is about vision. I agree with that.
The trouble I have is by opening the gates to anyone and everyone you run the risk of devaluing things. And maybe that's the trouble I have - I concern myself with value as well as impact. We'll take your paper crumpler/white on white example. Someone can crumple paper into balls and make a big show of it, and fancy themselves an artist. And someone, somewhere, could be moved by that. And they'd have a right to be, if it does it for them. I can't reconcile holding that exhibit up to a van der Weyden triptych and saying "these are the same."
And, again, maybe that's my problem. Maybe it's not even photography that's my problem. Maybe I have trouble with "everything the same."
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2007-06-14 15:17:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Everyone has it IN them to be an artist. All about vision sharing, man.
Submitted by Orgasmatron (user info) at 2007-06-14 12:11:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Exactly.
Everyone's an artist these days.
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2007-06-14 11:52:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Okay, last thought before I go away from this post for good:
Poetry is art.
You write poetry.
You are an artist.
Shlongy wrote 'Here I sit.' (A poem, for those not in the know.)
Shlongy is an artist.
Just like you!
Submitted by Orgasmatron (user info) at 2007-06-14 11:38:02 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I can't wait until there's an art exhibit involving self portraits taken with cell phone cameras.
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2007-06-14 11:06:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
But there is a necessary element of creation involved in photography as well....
No Ansel Adams did not form the Tetons from hand, nor did Arbus cut the dicks off of men who thought they should have been women and paint them in gaudy makeup and stuff them into cocktail dresses. But through an understanding of the tools, and applications of those tools, available to them they were able to capture those images in a way that very few others are able to.
And really, one thing about art is the inaccessability of its creation. If we can all do it, it loses its preciousness.
Capisce?
Further, isn't the application of deep thought, of reverie before investing oneself into the creation endeavour, symptomatic of art? The creation process is as much what art 'is' as the end result if what you wrote is to be taken at face value.
That sentence isn't exactly what I am trying to get at...
Here: Not everyone looks at water falling over the side of a cliff, surrounded by scraggly evergreen trees, and contemplates the exact way in which it should be best captured for eternity. They recognize its inherent beauty. They'd like to capture it. They see some natural beauty, and they point a camera, and click a button and have a family vacation snapshot that as they look at it later makes them wonder why the beauty their mind's eye remembers isn't represented in front of them.
One point of art is to showcase whatever the subject matter is in its most glorious form.
Is the ability to showcase somethings beauty to the utmost the ability to create art?
I guess I'd have to say yes.
To further that, evocation of emotional response is another...indicator, i guess...of art. Before, I spoke to things of beauty. Talented photographers, as with writers, painters, sculptors, etc, are capable of holding up what can be seen as ugly by most, and showing us the inner beauty of the thing. Or at least the inner wonder of the thing. Diane Arbus comes to mind.
Once I saw an art installation that was named 'White Trash'.
The 'artist' had taken various white things, mostly paper, crumpled them up and scattered them about a white background. Was he an artist? I'd say he was, and here's why.
He evoked an emotional response from me. I laughed at his creation, which was ultimately his goal with what he had created. He took a term with less than good connotations to it, turned it around in his mind and came up with a physical joke. Maybe not a great joke...I didn't laugh all that hard, but still I would have given it a zero rating if we were to speak about it in Ubersite terms.
I think a lot of abstract and surrealist painters get the smae treatment that photographers do.
"Oh, yes, very nice. But I (big capital I, maybe italicized too) could have done the same thing"
Well, no, no you couldn't. Or at least, no you didn't. So here we have something very nice that someone else just happened to create first.
Antother thing that comes to my mind when people say photography isn't art is some piddling little painting of sunflowers...I forget who painted it, but a lot of people look at it and say their preschooler could have created it. Here it is: http://www.artinthepicture.com/paintings/view.php?nr=1
I think the same guy painted a night sky that still receives the same kind of comment. Oh , here it is: http://www.poster.net/van-gogh-vincent/van-gogh-vincent-starry-night-7900683.jpg
Not sure who that guy was, but I guess I should just agree that he sucked.
</smartassery>
Bah, I'm just babbling now...
Nice naked chicks, kk, you fucking degenerate child botherer you.
Submitted by Orgasmatron (user info) at 2007-06-13 16:47:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I can understand why some people wouldn't think that photography is art. I'm sure it's something to do with how the photographer, unless he/she is incredibly hands on, merely captures a moment involving elements that are already arranged. Ansel Adams didn't take rock in his hands and form the Tetons, carve a curve into the earth and form a river in front of them, and THEN capture the image. He shot what he saw.
I think people tend to readily associate writing, painting, music and sculpture with art because there is a necessary element of creation involved. Arrangement, if you want a better word. There is proof that the artist - regardless of which of these enterprises he/she undertakes - has taken language, paint, sound or stone and skillfully put them together to form something that makes an impression.
Don't mistake me, I'm not discouting photography as art. My mind's not made up on that. Just musing in very general terms about why people might think it's merely beautiful opportunism is all.
Submitted by Amontillado (user info) at 2007-06-13 16:47:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
The girl in the last b&w had no nipples. It was disturbing.
Submitted by mockidol (user info) at 2007-06-13 16:29:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I collect jpg images obssesively because I never know when I'll be able to use them in a post.
I have tens of thousands, all organized. It's all really quite ridiculous.
-------------------------
Sounds like an impressive porn collection. perv.
Submitted by SgtHartman (user info) at 2007-06-13 13:56:49 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
mmmmmmm yes
everyone gets +2's today, its by birthday
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2007-06-13 13:46:25 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by iddqd (user info) at 2007-06-13 03:44:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
photography is not art. photography is a skill.
---
wrong.
a lot of people say this, and these are people who have no idea the things they can create using the camera tool to its fullest extent in combination with their own imaginations. they tend to think of the camera as a simple tool for capturing image, with there being very little valuable input from the photographer.
the guy who takes class photos to sell to proud parents is utilising a 'skill'.
Ansel Adams, Diane Arbus...people of this stripe utilised talents, through a tool, to create art. they are artists.
photography is 'only' a skill when that is as far as one can progress with it.
is being able to crank out an enjoyable story or poem an art or a skill? you are after all only using the handy and readily available to anyone tools of grammar and language.
is cranking out Bob Ross style paintings an art or a skill? i mean, painters are commonly seen as being artists...but these people are following a simple set of instructions and base techniques to make these things. really not much moire involved than in a paint by numbers.
this statement of yours, iddqd, is really a lot more narrow and closeminded than I think you tend to be.
Submitted by ilikesteak (user info) at 2007-06-13 13:44:02 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by AshK (user info) at 2007-06-13 13:00:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Nice, my favorite is the third one down on the far right. Sexy as hell.
The rest are nice, too.
The nipple-less girl gives me the willies. I dont' pictures of faces with no mouths either.
Hi, I'm captain random.
Submitted by firefly (user info) at 2007-06-13 12:18:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
No Comment
Submitted by experima (user info) at 2007-06-13 11:51:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-06-13 11:45:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
my kind of post.
Submitted by Sacrilicious (user info) at 2007-06-13 11:36:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Beauty.
Submitted by kaos-king (user info) at 2007-06-13 09:42:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
For those who might actually care...
The Armada Of Sensation prt3 is written, will be posted tomorrow.
Submitted by lover101 (user info) at 2007-06-13 09:36:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
No Comment
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2007-06-13 09:23:49 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
lesbians :)
also ONE GIRL HAS NO NIPPLES!!!
Submitted by DrogoRoch (user info) at 2007-06-13 09:04:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I love women in bed; I really can't wait until I find one in mine.
Submitted by creep_firebombing (user info) at 2007-06-13 08:44:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
yeah
Submitted by Flapjacksupreme (user info) at 2007-06-13 08:02:21 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Do those flapjacks even qualify as tits?
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-06-13 06:17:28 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
mmmmmmm hmmmmmmmm
lesbians
Submitted by Nellypaal (user info) at 2007-06-13 04:48:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
'I collect jpg images obssesively because I never know when I'll be able to use them in a post.
I have tens of thousands, all organized. It's all really quite ridiculous.'
That's lame.
Submitted by czwij (user info) at 2007-06-13 04:25:21 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
easy +2 for have decent looking lesbians.
Submitted by AsshOly (user info) at 2007-06-13 03:50:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
by which I mean I have not and will never get that far with any individual of the human variety.
Submitted by AsshOly (user info) at 2007-06-13 03:48:28 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
so thats what it looks like when a naked girl turns away. interesting.
Submitted by EmissionImpossible (user info) at 2007-06-13 03:46:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Surely Art is a skill too?
Submitted by iddqd (user info) at 2007-06-13 03:44:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
photography is not art. photography is a skill.
Submitted by EmissionImpossible (user info) at 2007-06-13 03:36:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I certainly approve. I give them wood.
Hang on....
Submitted by HateMudkips (user info) at 2007-06-13 03:35:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
#9, also
Submitted by HateMudkips (user info) at 2007-06-13 03:34:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
all good.. i think the second one is my favorite.
Submitted by particle_man58 (user info) at 2007-06-13 03:33:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I approve of this APW.