|
RSL
|
 |
« on: January 11, 2013, 08:58:36 AM » |
 Reply
|
Next week I'll contact Christie's and see if they're interested. I can make the print wall-sized if they think that'll help to sell it. Should sell for more than Rhine II since it has a more interesting background.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Slobodan Blagojevic
|
|
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2013, 09:06:44 AM » |
Reply
|
Sorry, Russ, even with your D800, a.k.a. The Detail Enhancer, I can not discern what's that in the background: dinosaur droppings, perhaps?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
amolitor
|
|
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2013, 09:21:25 AM » |
Reply
|
Those are hay bales, modern style!
So far this ain't doing much for me..
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
RobbieV
|
|
« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2013, 10:24:58 AM » |
Reply
|
For a minimalist inspired piece, I find the oranges distracting. It's probably because I don't understand the conventions though.
I'll start the bidding at $300,000.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bruce Cox
|
|
« Reply #4 on: January 11, 2013, 11:15:30 AM » |
Reply
|
The shadows of the central trees bother me. I fancy they would do better more nearly parallel with the fence or, failing that, completely parallel with the path. Don't pick the oranges though; I like-um.
Bruce
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Myrvaagnes
|
|
« Reply #5 on: January 11, 2013, 11:41:10 AM » |
Reply
|
Sorrry, Russ. There's too much going on on the other bank side of the path.
Simplify, simplify, simplify. And then make it huge.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
RSL
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 11, 2013, 12:42:19 PM » |
Reply
|
You're right Eric. Here's the final product -- cropped.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
amolitor
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 11, 2013, 01:20:12 PM » |
Reply
|
Now THAT is some excellent commentary there. It's much more clearly a direct reference to Rhine II, and a refutation of it.
That sounds all art-world bulls*tty, but I think it's actually a pretty reasonable way to look at it. Just because it's not in words doesn't mean it can't be pretty direct about peeing in someone else's corn flakes.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Rob C
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 11, 2013, 01:42:07 PM » |
Reply
|
Better peeing in those cereals that snap, crackle and pop; cornflakes have no drama. Even with semi-skimmed milk. I know: I test them every morning!
Rob C
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dave (Isle of Skye)
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2013, 01:50:43 PM » |
Reply
|
Now THAT is some excellent commentary there. It's much more clearly a direct reference to Rhine II, and a refutation of it.
That sounds all art-world bulls*tty, but I think it's actually a pretty reasonable way to look at it. Just because it's not in words doesn't mean it can't be pretty direct about peeing in someone else's corn flakes.
I thought the actual terminological usage of this type of phraseology was when trying to disuade someone from doing somthing stupid - I don't wish to p*ss on your chips (that's French fries for our American friends), or fart on your cornflakes, but...! Had to remove the following, as it was putting me off my cornflakes.. Thanks Rob  I must say I was shocked  |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 20, 2013, 05:09:27 AM by Dave (Isle of Skye) »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Rob C
|
|
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2013, 03:14:48 PM » |
Reply
|
I thought the actual terminological usage of this type of phraseology was when trying to disuade someone from doing somthing stupid - I don't wish to p*ss on your chips (that's French fries for our American friends), or fart on your cornflakes, but...! Another even less salubrious quote I once heard said to a young lady shop assistant who was not being very helpful to a gentleman customer of some advancing years, as he turned to walk out of the shop in digust - I wouldn't deal with her young'un, she wouldn't even p*ss in your mouth if your teeth were on fire... I must say I was shocked There are photographers who sell books etc. shooting exactly that, if without the fire. Sick world indeed. Rob C |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
