Photo Of The Day

This is a good read for the philosophically inclined
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/art-definition/

I'm wondering if I start to upload pictures of James Nachtwey, war photography, real war and surrounding... photography, how the community will react. They seems pretty open minded and full of joy on that subject.

Do what you like, personally I think it's a good thing. War photography, as shocking, as it is, is probably the most important form of photo journalism.

Canadian firefighters in Kuwait battle to seal an oil well.

1991

Sebastiao Salgado / Amazonas Images / nbpictures

Backstory

Marcom, I think you have entirely missed the point.

The ISS passes in front of the sun

Astronomers page

High res version

What's coming out the bottom of the fork?

The purest definition of art is anything made by man. To Narrow it down more than that ends up being very subjective.

I did a fantastic piece of art about an hour ago. I reckon if it rains heavily enough it might just get to the Tate Modern.

(I agree with what you say by the way it's just this presented me with the opportunity to tell everyone I've just done a poo).

art is in the eye of the beholder..

Duchamp's Fountain was an avant garde statement putting forwards the idea that anything, no matter how ordinary or menial, can be considered art once it has received the attention of an artist i.e. through a signature and/or a new meaning attributed to it. It caused a huge stir because it was barred from being exhibited from the show it was entered into because the curators couldn't decide whether it was art or not. It is now considered one of the first prominent examples of conceptual art, and Duchamp was the original creator of the 'readymade' art piece, and the reason that unmade beds can be nominated for Turner Prizes.

It was a joke, and a good one, and it is sad that it was subsequently taken seriously.

These ones are pretty much in the standards of the people who have complained about the picture of the naked woman.
I hope they will fill you with enough joy and forgive me for my intolerable sins, since you are so clean I'm sure you are gonna appreciate.

^^ Cf. yves Klein.

http://pervegalit.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/yvesklein.jpg

marcom, no one is saying that the naked woman offended them. It would just be nice of you to link to it rather than directly posting it on the thread, in case you're reading it in your office at lunchtime and someone opposite you sees it, and thinks you're some kind of pervert. That's pretty obvious, and there's no reason why you couldn't do that, and no reason to suddenly post loads of clothing catalogue photos.

yeah sure, I understand, totally, and that's way I posted four pictures, one for each of them, of happy family with joyful kids, so that now no one sited next to you observing your internet most ambitious life is gonna think that you're some kind of outrageous pervert.

I didn't know how dangerous it could be.

In the end it's only about to be considerate about a considerate community. Not too difficult.

hissy fit

No-one is saying you are a bad person for posting cliched art photography, that's fine. Whatever floats your boat, I'm sure you have caused lots if boners in lots of pairs of expensive tight jeans and I applaud you for that.
Seriously, it's fine.
You have also posted a lot of stuff that is really interesting, and I think I have even repped you for a few pictures you have posted in this thread.

No value judgement is implied when you are asked to link to pictures that might look a bit like soft porn when viewed over your shoulder by someone who would rather you were doing the work they're paying you for. You have responded as if the sentiment expressed was that there is something upsetting about these pictures, and so you are bravely standing up for gritty reality in a world where table legs are covered and smiles are forced at all times.
I agree with you when you say that there is something wrong with censorship of bums and tits when images of violence and brutal injury are not, but in this context no actual censorship has taken place, it's just a pragmatic rule to prevent misunderstandings. So grow up please.

No-one is saying you are a bad person for posting cliched art photography, that's fine. Whatever floats your boat, I'm sure you have caused lots if boners in lots of pairs of expensive tight jeans and I applaud you for that.
Seriously, it's fine.
You have also posted a lot of stuff that is really interesting, and I think I have even repped you for a few pictures you have posted in this thread.

No value judgement is implied when you are asked to link to pictures that might look a bit like soft porn when viewed over your shoulder by someone who would rather you were doing the work they're paying you for. You have responded as if the sentiment expressed was that there is something upsetting about these pictures, and so you are bravely standing up for gritty reality in a world where table legs are covered and smiles are forced at all times.
I agree with you when you say that there is something wrong with censorship of bums and tits when images of violence and brutal injury are not, but in this context no actual censorship has taken place, it's just a pragmatic rule to prevent misunderstandings. So grow up please.

I think you confusing me with someone else, i don't have any rep from you.

I post a bit of everything, including cliched art photography. Have a comment to the others posters about that as well, if you can.

I never thought anyone was saying that i'm a bad person.

Yes, censorship has taken place, see Velocio comment.

Whose alias are you?

Also, Alfie, because you seems to have a certain culture about photos, would be nice if you could start to post some of your knowledge, are you another journalism lover?

Yes, censorship has taken place, see Velocio comment.

Where's this sorry? or did he say something in this thread and delete it?