Let's start with this first one:
Umm...
Ok.
Well here's what IS good about this "photograph." Though, it's not really a photograph - it's a digitally-altered image. I would say that it liberally follows the Rule of Thirds (a rule that makes a photo interesting, based on the composition).
However, seriously, it looks like a 7-year old's playtime on a computer in which the kid went crazy with a stamp-tool. It could only vaguely be described as art, though it more reminds me of an art project.
So that wasn't exactly the best example. Let's move on to one's that I liked a whole lot better.
I love, love, LOVE that this photograph literally combines technology - some sort of circuitry - and an artistic statement. Though I can't really see the Rule of Thirds applied vertically, it is applied horizontally, and I believe it still is interesting because of its content and composition.
As you can see, these photos show a performance art piece. The colors, the composition, and the content are all dynamically interesting. I think that based solely on the fact that this is a photograph of art, it represents the topic at hand. How does technology affect art? Here, its capturing a performance piece that is supposed to be a fleeting moment - and creating something eternal and lasting.
Note: For those who are familiar with spotting photoshopped photographs, this last one has clearly photoshopped in people to create a crowd around the "art." The most obvious example? The woman in the gray dress who has stopped dead in her tracks immediately behind in a black top and light-blue patterned skirt.




No comments:
Post a Comment