You could get a gift for dsquared.
http://www.20x200.com/art/2010/12/dapper-owl.html
Well below the $20 mark:
http://www.amazon.com/Playing-Poker-Animal-Picture-Art/dp/B0027Z16OK
Too many of them look like t-shirts from Threadless, though. Or maybe Threadless is the Honda commercial soundtracks of rising visual artists.
We have a backlog of art to get framed and on to the wall.
I don't like the thing at the second link in the post even a tiny bit.
If you put a little mustard on it, it probably wouldn't be half bad.
Is there some kind of an art-law that stops them from printing more copies than they say they will on the listing? For many years, I have had a similar question about the Bradford Exchange's assurance that a given collectable plate was only made for 100 firing days.
I know that fraud is illegal, but I don't know where the lines are drawn between being honest and dishonest when inflicting art on people. You could make a very small change (particularly to this type of art) and technically be making a new design.
Too many of them look like t-shirts from Threadless, though.
I don't know Threadless, but I'm guessing this picks out a certain twee-ness in a lot of the pieces. You've gotta wade through a lot of that on these sites, I find. Poster #3 in the 1200 posters project definitely teeters on the edge of the twee, though I really like the whale balloons and the rendering of the flowers. But the text would disqualify it for me.
We have a backlog of art to get framed and on to the wall.
This is likely because we find things like castoff maps ("Parcel Land Use") from Tweety's mom's office and say, Wow, we should totally get that dry mounted and hang it on the wall!
re: 5
Ditto.
The couple of things I've clicked through to I don't like at all. If I had shit loads of money, though, I'd be out there getting classic Rodchenko, Lissitzky and the like. Photography by Moholy-Nagy, that sort of thing.
http://www.google.co.uk/images?q=moholy-nagy
and
http://www.google.co.uk/images?q=alexander+rodchenko
and
http://www.google.co.uk/images?q=el+lissitzky
5, 10: Agreed. I've been having a great deal of trouble with the whole internet connection thing this morning, but none of the art I got to load is something that I would put on my wall unless I was covering a hole in the plaster.
Huh. I like some of the stuff linked in 11, but taken as a collection, it's very colorless. Also the lines and circles things doesn't grab me, in general.
Yeouch, the 'Tiny Showcase' site even has its shop divided into Tee Shirts and Available Artwork.
11: I didn't like those either, for home at least. They remind me of an office.
It wouldn't have to be constructivist or 'Bauhaus' stuff, although I do love Moholy-Nagy and Rodchenko's photography. I could quite happily live with a bunch of pictorialist stuff. I'm not sure if that's currently fashionable or not? It goes through phases of being on a par with dogs playing poker. But still, some of it is great.
http://www.google.co.uk/images?q=edward+steichen&biw=1630&bih=1188
"Crystallized" is horrible. Why not this one instead?
Also: Tortoise
Jacks
Powerpuff
this picks out a certain twee-ness in a lot of the pieces.
Yeah, that sort of trendy-twee.
Also I agree about not liking text on stuff. It seems to be a big thing on the design sites to put giant words on your walls, or your drawers, or the riser part of your stairs. I don't like it at all.
Oh well, I just ordered something. Luckily, it's as a gift. Buying art as a gift: almost never a good idea. Lucky it's small!
That Lissitzky stuff is great. Didn't know who he was before. It's like de Chirico without all the messy objects and people and places.
This one is perhaps more expensive that you're wanting to spend, but is pretty.
a href="http://www.tinyshowcase.com/artwork.php?id=1773">This one is more like what I'd usually be drawn to (I like buildings), but it still doesn't totally grab me.
a href="http://www.littlepaperplanes.com/product/2699-fling-print">This might be my favorite one I've found so far. In cheap art, I usually find the botanical/slightly Asian-looking stuff to be the best (/least twee/most like what I think of as 'art').
Lemme try that again.
This one is perhaps more expensive that you're wanting to spend, but is pretty.
This one is more like what I'd usually be drawn to (I like buildings), but it still doesn't totally grab me.
This might be my favorite one I've found so far. In cheap art, I usually find the botanical/slightly Asian-looking stuff to be the best (/least twee/most like what I think of as 'art').
19: No link? How can we judge you?
re: 15
Only because, ultimately, like most art movements, a lot of early to mid 20th c. modernist stuff got co-opted and watered down. For me the original stuff is still very strong, and very attractive to me. I also quite like some of the corporate re-purposing of some of that stuff. e.g. things like Edward Steichen's cigarette lighter advertisement.
26: I'm sure Blume will love it.
I like the stuff in 16 better than 11. For some reason, I get wary about having people in my artwork, excluding photos of friends and family. It's weirdly intimate in a way that makes me incredibly picky.
I'm not liking much of anything I see on those sites.
On the other hand, it looks like I'd be happy letting ttaM decide what goes on my walls.
With photography I like a lot of people and have, I suspect, fairly mainstream/commercial taste, so I'd happily live with any number of things on my wall. Cecil Beaton, Irving Penn, Avedon, etc.
I bought this print online several years ago. The artist's etsy shop is here; unfortunately I like the stuff she used to do better than her more recent pieces.
The only time I impulse-purchased art over the Internet, I bought a bunch of Polish movie posters (yes, I do have the poster for the Polish release of "Short Circuit 2."). Got them framed, but I've not really wanted to put them up. Now they're in the basement. Hey, anyone want to buy some Polish movie posters?
Also, tbh, as a rampant egotist, most of the recent photographs I've had on my wall have been mine.
I love how heebie says, 'Here's some art that costs $20, cool!' and ttaM responds with, 'I'd really rather have a Moholy-Nagy or a Rodchenko.'
Depends on which movies they're Polish posters of.
Threadless does occasionally have awesome shirts though. Like this one. The problem is that I check the site rarely and the decent ones have always sold out by the time I find them.
Hey, anyone want to buy some Polish movie posters?
Serious? I love Polish movie posters.
I wanted to get one of those hand-painted Ghanaian movie posters for a while, but then they sold out of all the ones that didn't depict scenes of horrifying violence.
Although this site seems to now be focused on boring-seeming action movies.
I impulse-purchased some art Saturday night (I guess technically Sunday morning). An artist at the party I was at had given a print to the hosts, but they were returning it as they had decided they wanted it in a larger format. I was drunk, and I had the requisite $35, so I bought it. And then left it at the party. If I ever get it back, I hope I still like it.
I like this photo. Not as much as Crystallized, though.
I'm afraid I don't love the ones in 17, Ned. I loved that you dropped all those Pratt twin mystery titles in some old thread that someone linked to recently, though.
I am more on Ned's side than heebie's side of the Great Art War, but only barely, and wouldn't buy any of them.
17: 20x200 is a good place to shop for prints.
Aside from SC2, I can't really remember; I think I have "Love Story" and "Jaws 2". I wasn't really going for cinematic quality.
re: 46
I bet you'd like Martin Parr, too. I think Parr is a really interesting writer about photography but his own stuff gives me the boak.
http://www.google.co.uk/images?q=martin+parr&biw=1630&bih=1188
My favorite Etsy seller took all her listings down after making one sale, to me. I am the winner! You are all super jealous.
Hmm. Not trying to be irritatingly inscrutable, but that stuff doesn't grab me, either.
We bought a few of these prints recently. The originals are really cool -- most have thickly applied paint and use palette knives, which give the paintings nice depth and texture.
I like Ned's favorite in 17, but I would want a pretty large print of it. The Neshoba County Fair photo is nice, but looking at in a book nice, not hanging on my wall nice.
46: I really like that, too, and about a hundred times more than Crystallized, but I can see how the latter might appeal to your mathematician-ness. I'm with Blume, though, in that it's not the thing I'd most want hanging on my wall.
re: 55
What about Eggleston?
http://www.google.co.uk/images?q=william+eggleston&biw=1630&bih=1188
[Who I do like].
I love the illustrations in the children's book "The Snowy Day" so, so much. Maybe I can order a print of the cover.
looking at in a book nice, not hanging on my wall nice
"It's not you, art, it's me. I think we should see other prints."
I know almost nothing about photography, but I did goto an Eggleston exhibition here recently that was totes amazing.
I kinda like 59; "Crystallized" looks terrible to me on the Iphone, like dorm room art or something, not like I know anything or to be too much of a dick about it.
What about Eggleston?
I thought of him with these two.
how the latter might appeal to your mathematician-ness
It's not really the mathy-ness in it so much as the colors. I like the red and the hints of blues and tans, mixed in with the silvers and grays. And how it seems sharp and shiny.
I truly detest those two in 65.
Maybe I can order a print of the cover.
If it's a softcover book, you could just put a copy of the book in a frame. (Or are you not wanting the text?) I did this with one of the Acme Novelty Library books.
That's a good idea. I don't mind the text, since it's actually a book cover. Or I could go with one of the interior pages. The whole thing is just gorgeous.
Eggleston is better than that earlier guy. I like his colors better. I like the photo of the naked guy about four rows down, actually. I would definitely not put that naked guy on my wall, though.
But in general, artwork of people is just too intimate for me.
I would definitely not put that naked guy on my wall, though.
He probably wouldn't like being on your wall, even if he had pants.
The Internet doesn't really do Eggleston justice at all; he has some special way of developing the colors in the photos (maybe Ttam or someone can explain) that's amazing in real life.
re: 70
Oh yeah, I actively dislike Martin Parr's work. He's one of those love/hate photographers and a lot of people really hate him. I much prefer Eggleston.
I think with Parr there's a sense, and he's often been accused of this, that he dislikes his subjects. Similar to ajay's point in comments the other day about Little Britain: http://www.unfogged.com/archives/comments_11028.html#1270138
that he dislikes his subjects.
Yes! I hadn't put my finger on it.
re: 72
Dye transfer prints from Kodachrome negatives, I think. I wonder what he'll do now that Kodachrome -- which has a VERY specific look -- is no more? There are certain colour film stocks that have a particular look, e.g. under-exposed Velvia used by landscape photographers, or Kodachrome as with Eggleston and others. When particular film stocks die people get very annoyed.
e.g. http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcg_photo/2505587736/sizes/o/in/photostream/
That's just a snap I took, but I can't get that colour out of digital. That film was discontinued but is now available again, thankfully.
Speaking of colour, and Martin Parr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcg_photo/5206613425/
I wonder what he'll do now that Kodachrome -- which has a VERY specific look -- is no more?
Like Elaine and "sponge worthiness," he'll have to figure the opportunity cost of each shot.
re: 76
No, it's not that you can't buy it anymore, it's that it can't be developed any more. It uses a very specific process and for the last couple of years there has only been one lab in the world that could do it, and they recently stopped. It's gone, forever.
Other film stocks are different. If you freeze them they keep, so photographers keep freezers full of old film that's no longer made. As long as it's standard black and white, C-41 or E6 process they can develop it. Kodachrome, unfortunately, isn't like that.
It has an amazing look, especially in large format:
http://www.shorpy.com/image/tid/179
Then never mind. (I can't get the link to load, probably because of a local network problem that has been pissing me off all morning.)
The Snowy Day (and Keats' subsequent works) are quite beautiful.
If it's a softcover book, you could just put a copy of the book in a frame.
I'm planning to do this with the dust jacket of Dancing Larry for my niece & nephew.
(By the by, for folks who ask for ideas for presents for kids, Daniel Pinkwater's Larry and Irving and Mucktuck series are great.
For children less inclined to literature, Bendaroos are nice. Unless they have really cold fingers, because then you can't get them to stick together.
mcmc has plenty of art to sell you! Plus, it is really good!
Yes, mcmc - is there a link to your work?
I didn't know any of this about Kodachrome. This is sad news. I hate the Internet for delivering such sad news on a faux Monday.
Hey, anyone want to buy some Polish movie posters?
I have a Polish theater poster on my wall! Hooray!
re: 86
Yeah, there was a bit of a big deal about it in December. Steve McCurry shot the last roll ever.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12095771
3 gets it right, and I regard 9 as a mark of good taste.
If I were in the position to buy art, I'd start here and here (with obvious deference to mcmc).
If you're really into Pixar, there are a lot of Pixar artists with work in this online charity auction thing here.
Yes, mcmc - is there a link to your work?
Why yes. Yes, there is.
I should note that this is all old work: I just had my newer, eversomuchmoreawesome work photographed yesterday, which was a bitch, I tell you, because it's shiny, and also the above website is built in flash, whereas the new website I really really intend to build will not be. Further, if you are my facebook friend you can see not-very-good photos of some of the newer work there.
Very nice. It was somebody else who suggested you did dogs playing poker.
If I were putting movie posters on my wall, I'd get a print of this scene. I've always thought some of Aleister Crowley's Thoth deck would make good prints.
90: I'm fooling around with collages lately--I should include the poker playing dogs in those. Along with Jill from Mary Worth.
like castoff maps
I had this great, huge surveying map of some random part of the Chespeake Bay dry-mounted but after a few moves it got too ratty to hang up anymore. I like stuff like that.
But I've always had a hard time figuring out what I should put on the walls, so they're pretty bare. I have thought about getting a Jere knockoff wall sculpture or something, because I'm not hell-bent on avoiding things that are overdone. The other thing that appeals: enormous old movie posters. And good god do you know what those things cost?!
Do the works in 89 follow the general art-world maxim of "if you have to ask how much it costs, it costs too much for you to consider buying it"? Because I like some of those.
I emphatically don't like flash, though.
I have it on good authority that some of mcmc's works are priced such that even I could purchase them.
97 is very true, for an expansive definition of "I".
I have a couple Polish posters on my wall, including this one by Stasys which I love.
the general art-world maxim of "if you have to ask how much it costs, it costs too much for you to consider buying it"?
I would seriously question the validity of that maxim, and especially when buying directly from the artist.
Well, I just made it up, so I wouldn't necessarily expect it to have a ton of validity.
How dare you say you just made it up when I mentioned it (for antiquarian books) in my last post?
I believe the same rule applies to lingerie.
Urple, contact me through the email on the website if you want to know the price of anything. Some may already be sold, though not many, really.
96: Yeah, but it's so easy to build a slide show in Flash. I'm sick of learning things like html5 or javascript which have nothing to do with my core interests, yet take up inordinate amounts of brainshare. I just don't have that much to spare.
There are sites which allow artists to post portfolios and have their own urls and so on, but they usually have a bunch of branding and even advertising on them unless you subscribe at a premium level.
102: I just made it up as a general art-world maxim, I should say. Or maybe I'm repeating it from somewhere else I heard it. I honestly don't remember. The statement was not well sourced, was my point, so its validity is ripe for questioning.
102, 106, I thought the original came from J.P. Morgan talking about his yacht, "If you have to ask, you can't afford it."
Seems unlikely to be true when buying art online.
107: No, no, it's traditionally about polo ponies.
Whereas "if you have to ask, you better not mess with it" is the response to the question "What is jazz?"
No, that's "if you have to ask, you'll never know".
And then there's the topic "if you have to know, you'll never ask" refers to.
Then how do I know when it's pornography?
111: Sexual orientation? Love? Really good sausage from a really dirty deli? Help me out here.
Actually, Umberto Eco has answered that, in one of the essays in, I think, How to Travel with a Salmon.
I think that, according to his definition, Solaris might be pornography.
Art pricing for normal people is pretty transparent. Galleries have price lists. They'll also just tell you the price if you ask. If you have some relationship with the gallery (like you might buy from them again, or have bought from them in the past) or even if you just ask for it, you can often get a standard 10% discount. I was at an art fair once and asked about the price of a smallish Richter squeegee painting (I love them) and was quite surprised when the gallerist became very attentive. $300,000, which I did not look like I was good for, but I guess they can't take a chance on screwing up a potential sale. When I responded that it sounded a little out of my price range, I was immediately offered the discount. ($5 was not forthcoming.)
At the super high end, things probably get tricky. (Like, Julie Mehretus are very scarce and you have to be the right sort of person even to be considered for ownership, but also maybe you could get a good deal on a trio of those giant Richard Serras if you need them for the sculpture park in your private principality or something.) And if you know the artist, then depending on your relationship and the artist's personal policy about studio sales you can sometimes get stuff for a lot less than gallery prices.
114: With the resolution of Atari, you'd need a pretty active imagination.
111 is about guys never asking for driving directions amirite?
I am digging mcmc's work.
Sorta kinda offtopic: I keep wondering if there's a term for when some piece of art or music becomes popular or valued because of its use along with a different, even more popular or valued artform. Like how George Condo got written up in the New Yorker on the occasion, I assume, of doing the Kanye West album cover. Or, to give the specific example that provoked my curiosity, how I've never been into Grizzly Bear, but since I watched Blue Valentine, for which they did the music, I am considering becoming a fan. The term in question being how you might not be interested in a work on its own, but seek out because of its association with some other work you like.
Don't let me derail a discussion on pornography, though.
113: clearly it's not very important to you.
A movie in which Gilbert did nothing but rape Gilbertina, front, back, and sideways, would be intolerable. Physically, for the actors, and economically, for the producer. And it would also be, psychologically, intolerable for the spectator: for the transgression to work, it must be played out against a background of normality. …
Therefore the pornographic movie must present normality - essential if the transgression is to have interest - in the way that every spectator conceives it. Therefore, if Gilbert has to take the bus and go from A to B, we will see Gilbert taking the bus and then the bus proceeding from A to B. …
I repeat. Go into a movie theater. If, to go from A to B, the characters take longer than you would like, then the film you are seeing is pornographic.
Note the semiotician's typical assumption that the audience's interest in pornography is an interest in the transgression of normality, and that therefore normality must be depicted as well, as if we don't get quite enough of it in our, well, normal lives.
I don't know Threadless
I think both times I've met you I've been wearing a Threadless shirt. I definitely was at the meetup in SF.
I don't think I understand structuralism, or post structuralism, or whatever Eco's supposed to be.
110: It's an acceptable variant.
Another interesting thing is that you can get a hand-made oil-painting reproduction of whatever famous painting you'd like. I recall reading about this--that is, reading about the oil-painting-reproduction factories in China or wherever that produce these--years ago via a link from Tyl/er Cow/en, but I just stumbled upon a few such shops now. (I'm annoyed I can't order a print of that picture online from the Leopold Museum, where I got one a half-dozen years ago. Grr.)
I repeat. Go into a movie theater. If, to go from A to B, the characters take longer than you would like, then the film you are seeing is pornographic.
How, using this standard, would you tell porn from a really bad movie? Or is that his point?
126: The follow-up questions are, "Is there a brown chicken? Is there a brown cow?"
126:Not just "bad" movies
The tension between the syuzhet and the fabula is what creates interest in movies.
The tension between the syuzhet and the fabula
Like "Who's the Boss" when you knew Tony and Angela would get together.
125: For reasons too complicated to get into, my household purchased multiple handmade reproductions of a Caspar David Friedrich painting several years ago from a contact at a Dafen village factory. It wasn't part of the factory's normal catalog, so we scanned in a large scale print at high definition. Anyway, there were some quality control problems. It must be that Fauvism is generally a lot more popular than German Romanticism, because the first few drafts came back very rollicking and splotchy, basically a monk by the sea as painted by Andre Derain.
7: Is there some kind of an art-law that stops them from printing more copies than they say they will on the listing?
I'm not a print-making expert, but I have friends who are, and as I understand it, when you're talking about a standard hand-made silkscreen, the screen is only going to last for a certain number of prints. And of course when you have multiple colors in the art, you're talking about several different screens. So it's not so much that more prints couldn't be made, as that it's kind of a hassle to make them in the first place, and if you have to start from scratch when a screen wears out, the laziness of any given print-maker is probably going to overcome the possibility of pecuniary recompense involved in producing a new run of an old poster. This would not apply so much to lithographs, offset or digital printing, but most of the stuff in this category is hand-screened from what I understand.
I can't imagine having Schiele on my wall.
A movie in which Gilbert did nothing but rape Gilbertina, front, back, and sideways, would be intolerable. Physically, for the actors, and economically, for the producer.
Much though I love Eco, I'm not sure he has a grasp on the economics of porn. Which may, now that I think about it, be another reason to love him.
Further to 131, I suppose if everyone else is promoting their favorite posters, I should link to my friend's site. Their aesthetic is not for everyone, but I like it.
132:The early landscapes are quite fine.
134: I like 'em, too. I have a friend I should buy that David Bazan tour poster for.
I can't imagine having Schiele on my wall.
For a while I had a postcard from my then-girlfriend with The Embrace on it posted on my wall.
(And to the OP: You should totally go to the East Austin Studio Tour the next time it rolls around. There's a lot of dross, but I bought an encaustic painting I really like a couple of years ago for $60.)
For reasons too complicated to get into
Naturally I am now extremely curious about these reasons. I am imagining all kinds of wonderful scenarios, but I think my favorite is the one where you were building a shed out of them.
Much though I love Eco, I'm not sure he has a grasp on the economics of porn. Which may, now that I think about it, be another reason to love him.
I'm not sure he has a complete grasp on the content of porn, either. From 119:
(I might point out that there are no pornographic films in which men couple with mares and bitches: why not?)
Really? None? I can't say that I can offer a rebuttal off the top of the head, but I'd be willing to wager a tidy sum that this statement is extremely false.
117: I keep wondering if there's a term for when some piece of art or music becomes popular or valued because of its use along with a different, even more popular or valued artform. [...] The term in question being how you might not be interested in a work on its own, but seek out because of its association with some other work you like.
I'm not aware of any such general term. It seems like a fairly widespread phenomenon; you could see that just in something like a given dressmaker's work becoming popular/valued because a celebrity wears it. The celebrity effectively endorses the lesser known.
In bookselling and collecting there are so-called "association copies", but that's somewhat different: it describes a case in which, for example, a completist collector of some writer is interested in acquiring yet another copy (otherwise not valuable, just a cheap reprint) of one of the writer's works, because this one is inscribed by the writer to some other famous person. Or, conversely, some book that's not particularly interesting or valuable in itself becomes so because it's the famous writer's copy, in which he/she has written notes, and -- to make it properly an association copy -- the writer knew that author.
Not quite the same thing, but it's still the trickle-down, or -over, effect.
140: Don't tell him about herpy.net.
And, don't go googling that at the office. In fact, don't google it at all.
If, to go from A to B, the characters take longer than you would like, then the film you are seeing is pornographic.
I've never liked that essay. Or the one about wearing jeans. Or Foucault's Pendulum. Or the movie of The Name of the Rose.
Eco was perfectly cordial when I met him, though.
some book that's not particularly interesting or valuable in itself becomes so because it's the famous writer's copy, in which he/she has written notes
My dream is to become famous enough that my copy of the novelization of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is worth fifty bucks.
In fact, don't google it at all.
In fact, best to just back slowly away from the computer and never look back.
I've just wasted a whole day de-confusing myself about something I understood perfectly a year ago. I think my belated new year's resolution is to type up detailed notes on everything complicated I take the time to understand, so I don't have to repeat it all the next time I get confused.
Ha! Like that's ever going to happen.
the one where you were building a shed out of them.
Something like that!
Coincidentally, I just finished reading for the first time David Foster Wallace's essay on the adult video awards. It doesn't seem as though porn is bothering very much nowadays (and that was 1998) with setting a realism/normalcy bar in their stories. Arguably, however, the whole pr0n webcam and girls gone wild genres have this tawdry realism as an aesthetic anchor. But then Eco is primarily a narrative semiotician; Roland Barthes was the one more interested in sad static details as signifiers for realism.
144: Flippanter is an association copy!
Teasing, teasing.
Oh god, why do I always forget how confounding and weird herpy.net is?
150: Some people are lucky that way.
I totally want the second print on this page (the NY Post print) and if it were dollars instead of pounds I'd buy it in a heartbeat. I love this site even though approximately half of the work really annoys me. I bought a David Shrigley print from them that still makes me happy every time I come up my stairs. Which is no longer available, so they really do limit their editions.
For posters, the Prado has monetized its collection by offering Print on Demand. For instance, Las Meninas can be had in prices ranging from 10€ (A4 paper) to 125€ (A0 canvas).
The copies on display were pretty good.
I think my belated new year's resolution is to type up detailed notes onblog everything complicated I take the time to understand
7: Is there some kind of an art-law that stops them from printing more copies than they say they will on the listing?
This is actually kind of an interesting thing about ethics, really. It's obviously bad to pull more than you say you will (and generally most people are pretty good about this) but there's all sorts of stories about Warhols and so-on that mean auctioneers have to choose their words careful when some of those works come up. But you are allowed to pull so many artist's proofs, and so-forth.
Many printmakers will mark the plates after the first edition.
There's a funny thing about Rodin here, because original Rodins continue to be produced. The French Government owns the rights to the Estate, and one associated right is to cast from Rodin's molds. And they do. And it's hard to see how what they are doing is different from what Rodin himself did, except Rodin's dead.
Julie Mehretus are very scarce
Oh, this is indeed a sad thing. I will surely never get one.
If they filled the mold with Jello, that would be different.
157more: Because you know, if there were more of them, I could just go buy one. A, um, very small one.
A Jello Rodin would be pretty awesome.
141- It seems like a fairly widespread phenomenon; you could see that just in something like a given dressmaker's work becoming popular/valued because a celebrity wears it. The celebrity effectively endorses the lesser known.
I could extrapolate the term "celebrity effect" from this, which I think would work alright. Although I feel like what I'm trying to describe has more to do with one piece of art/writing/whatever being enhanced by its association with another piece of art rather than with a celebrity or personality. Maybe this doesn't happen often, though?
157- I've heard there is a drop-off in quality even in printmaking techniques like lithography, which means there's historically been a tension between artists wanting to preserve quality and dealers wanting to extract more profit by continuing to use plates for too long (with artists sometimes destroying plates to prevent this). As I understand, with offset digital printing, there is actually no such drop off in quality, so the incentives have now been reversed— now it's dealers who limit print runs to create value and scarcity, and artists who make too many prints (cf. Annie Leibovitz) run the risk of losing out in terms of compensation.
That is a rare photo of Sean Connery signed by Roger Moore.
Um, I meant to 156 and that line of conversation rather than 157.
Time's up! I'm buying Crystallized and going to bed. Night all!
I wonder about the structural strength of Jello. I'm not asking for a raised arm, but, if you used extra gelatin, I think if you could get something like "the Thinker." On a small scale.
163: If I were rich, I'd have bought the whole run this morning. And then returned them all this afternoon, because capital must not be frittered away.
164- Maybe you could also introduce small bits of pineapple into the Jello to increase its structural strength.
Maybe you could make a pensive-looking statue of one of our dumber VPs, constructed entirely of fish eggs.
168: That is what I was trying to get at, but I forgot the name.
I wonder if carrot shavings would work like the little bits of fiberglass in the rebarless concrete often used today. Otherwise, why would anybody put carrot shavings in Jello?
i dislike most everything i link-clicked in this thread. although, most of what is on my walls is framed images i found on google or blog posts that i printed off at work. and band posters.
Click on my link! There are band posters there!
I want this painting very much, but I suspect it's soul-crushingly expensive. If any of you New Yorkers happen by DC Moore, you could find out.
About a year or so ago there were, in a cafe a mere two blocks from where I live, some pieces that were unusual for art-in-a-cafe in being neither paintings nor photographs, really striking, and extremely expensive.
173.--There's a phone number on the link, Jesus. You could just call and ask.
I did this for my boss last week. The gallery wanted to get my info, but I demurred. They eventually quoted me a price anyway.
I know I could, but I don't want to hear the bad news directly.
When I was in New York last year, I happened into the Gagosian gallery store to make fun of all the fancy-schmancy art and fell in love with a small print of Murakami's A Picture of the Blessed Lion who Stares at Death. When Mrs. K-sky and I moved, we decided to get it for our new home. (Small only in relation to the room-size original -- it's about 50" wide.)
Also there are Art Monks staying at my house tonight.
The splurge on the print was partially because we gave a pair of Aaron Morse drawings back to my ex since there wasn't room for them in the new place and they frightened Mrs. K-sky.
||
http://www.viceland.com/int/v18n1/htdocs/fashion-riot-girls-literally-665.php?page=5
http://www.viceland.com/int/v18n1/htdocs/fashion-riot-girls-literally-665.php?page=4
This is exactly like something out of one William Gibson's recent 'books about London and jeans'.
Via:
http://adswithoutproducts.com/2011/01/19/always-already-there/
Who writes:
The knowing non-surprise that comes of seeing this sort of thing, but still of course always a trace of shock. The fashion shoot was planned, no doubt, with nearly as much rigor as the demonstrations themselves - planned to capitalize, quite literally, on what seemed to be a nearly sudden outbreak of contingency in the heart of the metropolis. But no doubt, like the cops, the editorial staff too was watching the twitter feeds, setting up dummy facebook accounts to know what was happening and when and where.
>
I bought a rather nice print from here for someone's Christmas present. Rather I walked into their gallery in the 'ditch, but then, interwebs and all that.
77: Part of the problem being that Kodachrome's process involved some really hardcore industrial chemistry with several different highly toxic solvents, strong acids, and the whole thing operating at high temperatures and pressures with various horrible failure modes. The others are apparently much more tractable and less likely to kill you if you get it wrong. There's an argument that it's a bit of a panda bear - is saving it just getting in the way of evolution?
Anonymous, on Jan 18, 2011 wrote:
This is pretty low, even for you. A position of abject irony doesn't abdicate you of your moral responsibility, you know.
Vice's offices are just round the corner from my office. We could have a meetup and stage a mass protest.
Sadly, they'd be delighted, so I probably won't make this happen.
re: 181
Yeah, there is that. That's why it's only been Dwayne's doing it for the last few years. I'd imagine that Nik Software, or some other specialist in that area produces something that gets you pretty close from digital.
There is a school of photographer who seem to relish toxicity, though. You can buy black and white developers these days with very low toxicity and which don't have any adverse consequences for aquatic life and the like -- they use phenidone and ascorbic acid, and other chemicals that are much less toxic than in the past -- but there are some people who've revived older developers that have higher toxicity than common commercial products. Pyrogallol and the like. They probably aren't _that_ toxic compared to some other household chemicals, especially given that they are also used fairly dilute, but still, it does seem mildly perverse.
Where does "historical preservation" and "really getting into the science" stop, and "the chemical equivalent of the bit in The Naked Lunch where Dr. Benway deliberately endangers and then saves the patient as an artistic gesture?" begin?
re: 185
Heh. Hard to say.
I wouldn't personally work with a lot of historical developing techniques or printing methods; but you can't deny that daguerreotypes and ambrotypes and other 'wet' processes can look pretty amazing.
Some quite widely used (and cool-looking) historic processes aren't particularly toxic,* they are just messy as they use liquid emulsions and chemicals that stain.** But with daguerreotypes you're buggering about with mercury fumes, bromine fumes and the like. Not nice.
With non-historic processing, though, choosing certainly relatively non-toxic and widely available developing agents over much more toxic agents when both do substantially the same job does seem like a bit of a no-brainer.
* I wouldn't personally be buggering about with some of them at home, mind.
** Although some people use cyanide in their work flow, which is 'special'
widely used (and cool-looking) historic processes aren't particularly toxic
Apparently, everybody is thinking Arby's today.
I like lead white. So malleable and luminous.
Did mcmc ever link to her stuff? Because it is very good. And very reasonable.
Mmmm, lead white. And real Naples yellow. Neither of which I ever use anymore.
190: Way way back at 89, Will.
Geez, mcmc. I was giving you another opportunity to repost the link.
192: Art should rage!
I don't know diddly about art, but I do know that you guys are THE BEST!
We have these usually pretty pointless trainings and today they had an art therapist come in and I suppose art therapize us. It had something to do with burnout. One of the pictures I drew was of me destroying my clients' dreams so yeah I guess burnout.
What if I'm stuck in some terrible office-themed version of Inception where my little am-I-dreaming-right-now talisman is a fucking staple remover. Oh god.
I finally watched The Human Centipede yesterday. On my shiny new HDTV! Unfortunately, already knowing the entire plot of the movie kinda robbed it of most of its novelty.
192: Art should rage!
Art is not a mirror—it is a hammer.
already knowing the entire plot of the movie kinda robbed it of most of its novelty
I haven't seen the movie, but I was under the strong impression that watching a preview of the movie was enough to reveal more or less the entire plot. I mean, aren't you 75% of the way there if you've just read the movie's title (and understand its meaning)?
BTW, how's your new HDTV? And which did you get?
Yeah, but I knew how it ended, how each character died, etc. Also, whatever movie you constructed in your mind is likely far worse than the film itself, which actually keeps a lot off screen.
I got one of these for $700, and it's a hell of a toy. Quite the upgrade from my slowly dying 27" CRT.
natillio: yeah, those aren't bad. Not actdually similar to most of my posters, which i htink is because they are more from record stores promotional stuff, not gig promotion stuff
203: That may be the exact same one I got--and we also upgraded from a dying 27" CRT. At fist I found it made some interior scenes look like cheap soap operas, maybe something about the contrast between foreground and background, something like that. I also find myself noticing a lot more subtle continuity errors.
205: Apparently that's the official HDTV of Unfogged (I own one too). The soap opera effect is actually an artifact of the TV taking input shot at 24 fps and interpolating extra frames to bump it up to the standard video framerate. You can fix it by turning off "Auto Motion Plus", which is buried deep in one of the configuration menus.
207.last: Thanks, interesting. Will try that when I got back home.
Apparently that's the official HDTV of Unfogged (I own one too).
As do I now, except it's the British version and also also has 3D capability. Otherwise it seems to be identical. Great isn't it? Josh's tip is well attested. Apparently you can keep some of the benefits of the Motion Plus without getting the soap opera effect by changing the setting to custom, turning the blur reduction up to full and the judder reduction off.
I'll be the dissenting voice. I've yet to see a large LCD telly that I could live with on non-HD sources. Woeful woeful woeful emperor's new clothes shite. All of them. I've seen some, even at the cheap end, that look great from Bluray, or other HD but they all look like pixellated motion-blurred hopeless shit with standard def telly. Everyone I've asked with an expensive telly either just admits that's true but you 'learn to live with it', or never watches much broadcast telly.
So I bought a plasma, as I could live with it on normal Freeview.
I find the SD picture quality on my new telly much, much better than my old LCD (also a Samsung but 5+ years old). I've never tried watching an analogue signal, it's true, but the digital picture is brilliant even on SD. Maybe not plasma brilliant, but certainly better than any CRT I had. That said , you really need HD input to get your money's worth out of it. And it may be less true for watching sports, as LCDs always struggle with fast moving grass. But as I don't watch much sport and do play a lot of videogames and watch a lot of Blu-Rays and HD video files, that's fine by me.
And with Freeview HD, most of the UK TV I want to watch is in HD now anyway. It's only really Film Four and the odd thing on BBC 3/4 that isn't.
It's possible we are differently sensitive to it. I found even fancy upscaling LCDs unacceptable with SD freeview when I was shopping earlier in the year, hence the choice of a plasma. I'm very sensitive to motion blur. It makes me feel seasick. I also do like watching sport, so perhaps that was a factor. I found even the HD demos of Sky Sports pretty poor on LCD tellies.
But yeah, if I was someone who did a lot of gaming and BluRay watching it's possible I'd have chosen differently. I've seen lots of LCD tvs that look fantastic with Blu-Ray. I'd bet that your LCD type telly is better for that than the plasma I have. But since I mostly watch standard def telly -- and could afford to upgrade my TV or my PVR to hi-def but not both -- it was obvious to me which to choose. I really couldn't live with any LCD tv I've seen on non-HD sources.
I considered plasma since they're cheaper, but the set's in a brightly lit room with windows directly facing it, and I found the in-store reflections distracting enough.
I don't really have any issues with reflections on mine, but I suppose the sun hits it at an oblique angle.
Apparently that's the official HDTV of Unfogged
No kidding I just bought the 46" version of that same line. Love it.
At fist I found it made some interior scenes look like cheap soap operas, maybe something about the contrast between foreground and background, something like that.
Oh yeah, I've noticed this. Also I can psyche myself into thinking the voices don't match the lips really easily, although that's faded with time. When we first got the fancy TV it happened a lot.
Huh. I didn't realize that fancy new tvs were so shitty. I guess I'll try to hold on to my slowly dying 27" CRT for a while longer.
