http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2010/12/28/chicago-nanny-discovered-to-be-master-street-photographer/
This a great one :thumbsup:
This a great one :thumbsup:
who decides these ppl are "masters" anyway... just curious.
who decides these ppl are "masters" anyway... just curious.
who decides these ppl are "masters" anyway... just curious.
according to the curators of the exhibition and people who went to see it....
but i think it's just a ploy for the greed of one man to try to gain riches by publicizing this.
who decides these ppl are "masters" anyway... just curious.
publicity is just marketing, the value of art still depend on the value of art work that they put on market. Let the market decide the price, so normally art collection has no price, there are always put on auction. The market will decide the value.
It just a name.
Do you think her photographs are good?
There is no right answer.
who decides these ppl are "masters" anyway... just curious.
I don't know her exact reasons, but if she really was so uptight about her private images, then she could have shot without film (empty camera), or burn all her negatives and images before she died at old age.........but watching the video itself, it brings one to the debate table of whether it's right. the original artist is someone who values her privacy and didn't want people touching her stuff.
what i'm talking about is this ethical dilemma.
are we respecting the rights of the dead? if we respect her rights, and keep the photos locked up, everyone won't know who she is, or the wonderful images she took.
but if we showcase these images to the world, to let everyone see this hidden talent, and ignore her cries for privacy while she was alive, then are we not invading human rights?
at the end of the interview video this was one of the questions thrown out to the person who discovered this.