Award-winning photography? Help me out here

[mnoble]

We will always find ourselves "not getting it" with regard to some other photographer's work. Every artist has their own vision and they will speak to a certain part of the general audience and not to others.

As a photographer who is a devotee of B&W images I would love to have my own gallery opening and be considered and singled out in the "Fine Art" world of photography. I constantly look at others work, especially in such publications as B&W Magazine. And I will always find work that leaves me muttering and wondering if I am just too old to appreciate someone's avant garde style. Other's work just knocks me out. I get it and appreciate it and am awed by it.

Such is art. Completely subjective. And the comments about marketing and promotion are correct as well. The artist needs representation.

Just my two cents.

[gr82bart]

Hmmm ... if I don't like Pintos then I can say it's not a car. I'm starting to get the logic in this website's membership.

Regards, Art.

[thodges]

This guy is an artist, whereas many are just photographers.  There is a distinct difference, which many photographers do not get, possibly because they view the world around them differently.  Ultimately, photography is unimportant, it is just the medium which this artist has chosen to portray his artistic vision.  It's that artistic vision which is paramount.

Thanks also for bringing his name to my attention, as aside from being a fellow artist, I am also a collector myself and would certainly consider investing in some of Yusuf's work.

Recently someone drew my attention to the work of a new young photographer, Yusuf Ozkizil.  He's been getting a lot of coverage, and good luck to him.

Looking at the photos, I realised there was something I wasn't "getting".  I could understand well enough why he had taken the photos, but I couldn't understand why, out of all the gazillions of photos out there, Yusuf's have been singled out for such a lot of coverage.

I'm really not interested in criticizing this photographer, or current photographic styles.   I'm keen to understand what it is that I'm not getting about this and similar photos.

[WalterHawn]

... if I don't like Pintos then I can say it's not a car.

No,no,no!  A Pinto was a car, even a pretty good car in some contexts.  Now, the Vega -- that was not a car.

[bill t.]

No,no,no!  A Pinto was a car, even a pretty good car in some contexts.

Except for the unfortunate context of exploding in flames due to minor rear end collisions!    Any mass market model of Fiat, now THOSE were truly not cars!

I'm basically with Russel a on this one, I've seen that recipe at work many times.

The guy does deliver a certain amount of young, trendy energy.  But so do a couple of the kids in any college photo class.  I bet I could pull together an equivalent if not more interesting set of photographs within an hour or two of selecting snapshots from Pbase.  Wonder how far I could get creating an e-persona that way.

[John Clifford]

And that is exactly how THIS GUY came to be regarded as an "artist"...

I'll agree that Mr. Belger's works demonstrate craftsmanship, however, I think his use of human skulls is exploitive. If he had made his cameras with other objects, say, plastic milk jugs, would they have the same reaction from the art market? (No.) I think he recognizes this as well, trying to excuse the exploitation by saying that his use of human body parts is somehow okay because "the skull was blessed by Tibetian monks"... and of course we all know that the blessings of Tibetian monks are the sine qua none of ethical behavior.

I put Mr. Belger's 'art' in the same class as that of the plastinated body exhibits that have made the rounds in the past few years... and would like to know where Mr. Belger's skulls came from. Was it the same place as the Chinese bodies, many of which showed signs of government execution?

I wrote an article on ethics in art a while ago, and I think Mr. Belger's art shows the same lack of ethics. I guess anything goes if it's about making money with art... sigh....

[russell a]

For those interested in how the Art Market works, I highly recommend The $12 Million Stuffed Shark - The Curious Economics of Contemporary Art by Don Thompson, PALGRAVE MacMillian, New York, 2008.

[mas55101]

It's simple – the man can see.

He has a strong sense of design and colour as well as a keen sense of the absurd.

Michael

I have to agree on this one.

Everything else is a matter of marketing, taste, willingness to read a photograph.

Oh, and one big thing, the willingness to take the photograph in as interesting a manner as possible.  "There's no such thing as a boring subject..."

Michael A