robin
Stylish Dinosaur
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2006
- Messages
- 12,378
- Reaction score
- 161
What a horrid write-up.
"but I felt that here was the first real fine art photographer of the digital age."
Why don't you tell us why you don't agree?
STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.
Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.
Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!
Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
What a horrid write-up.
Why don't you tell us why you don't agree?
because digital photography has been "high" art since at least the mid-90s and there are hundreds of photographers using the medium who are much more accomplished than the Sartorialist. I am sure he would tell you the same himself.
See? That's fair, critical, and reasonable. Calling the author drunk is none of those.
Arthur Miller once said that there was an essential "tragic element" to Cartier-Bresson's photographs, and I would say that most good photographs contain something of that element; I don't see that in the Sartorialist's photos though I daresay that many of those subjects would be angry if they were in fact, subjects of some "tragic" context.
So you don't have a problem with what he does but you got to drop a couple names?
Either way, it's the fact that his apparent blogging has been taken to the realms of "high photography" that sort of grates me.
Maybe that's why I feel so little indignation when the Sartorialist comes up.