tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post2378201163308169320..comments2023-08-20T05:06:10.517-04:00Comments on The Year in Pictures: At The LouvreThe Year in Pictureshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03523797971986864363noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-69694948493510387032007-11-26T13:26:00.000-05:002007-11-26T13:26:00.000-05:00I realize that you were complimenting the Alcock p...I realize that you were complimenting the Alcock photo by making the comparison but calling it "unwittingly artful" implies that the photographer had no clue he was making an artistic picture. <BR/><BR/>My argument is that he certainly knew just as much as Struth knew. I think it's obvious that Alcock had both journalistic and artistic intent in mind.Horse Thinkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04944260883747331288noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-67287098729222603092007-11-26T10:04:00.000-05:002007-11-26T10:04:00.000-05:00I appreciate your point. My point was that while ...I appreciate your point. My point was that while one had journalistic intent and the other "artistic", they were equally strong pictures. I was trying to give Alcock kudos.The Year in Pictureshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03523797971986864363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-71042950386742880662007-11-26T08:59:00.000-05:002007-11-26T08:59:00.000-05:00I appreciate your post but judging from Ed Alcock'...I appreciate your post but judging from Ed Alcock's award winning career and website his work is anything but "unwittingly artful." <BR/><BR/>Unwitting would be if he was just a tourist passing through the museum and happened to snap that photo.Horse Thinkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04944260883747331288noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-9353693189804576642007-11-26T08:25:00.000-05:002007-11-26T08:25:00.000-05:00Shortly after posting the above, I opened the New ...Shortly after posting the above, I opened the New York Times to read Martha Schwendener's review of MoMA's current and disappointing "New Photography" exhibition. Schwendener concludes "... so far (MoMA) has been weak in showcasing new developments and contextualizing contemporary photography within the collection, which helps explain the jarring transition from Stieglitz & Company to the current crop. You hate to be the spoiler, the insatiable art viewer constantly demanding that rush of something new. But when a show is called “New Photography 2007,” you feel within your rights."The Year in Pictureshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03523797971986864363noreply@blogger.com