I have been there and shot Antelope Canyon, as have thousands. This is a great shot, which you could have only done with a view camera in the old days, but not so difficult in today's digital world. I can't imagine this valuation on an photo that can be replicated so easily.
I prefer the series where the photographer hired an Native American to pose with his horse in there.
BTW, a few years before I was there, some people were drowned in a flash flood in the other section of the oft photographed canyon.
Art isn't art. There is no special spiritual significance to art in any form. It is just decoration, whatever technique is applied. Its nice to have pretty things to look at, or use.
Wow, I'm kinda surprised at the responses here. "Phantom" is, to my eyes, hauntingly beautiful - the right place at precisely the right time. And if the purchaser didn't also purchase the negative with assurances that no prints or engravings had been made, then he greatly overpaid. But thank you Prof. Althouse for showing us this work of art.
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Encourage Althouse by making a donation:
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
12 comments:
It's a neat picture. If I took it, I might even post it on facebook.
I can't imagine spending that kind of money on any photograph. Unless I'm mistaken, it's totally reproducible.
Great value usually comes from scarcity. The photograph is contemporary and reproducible so it's hard to imagine where that value comes from.
I have been there and shot Antelope Canyon, as have thousands. This is a great shot, which you could have only done with a view camera in the old days, but not so difficult in today's digital world. I can't imagine this valuation on an photo that can be replicated so easily.
I prefer the series where the photographer hired an Native American to pose with his horse in there.
BTW, a few years before I was there, some people were drowned in a flash flood in the other section of the oft photographed canyon.
And yet the photographs of Jennifer Lawrence were free.
Sometimes I don't understand capitalism.
I am Laslo.
Nice. I would pay $10 for a print of that.
Yes but, once one gets started on "That's not art," where does one stop?
Behold (for example) Yves Klein's "IKB 79": is it art, or just a large paint chip?
http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/klein-ikb-79-t01513
Am I the only one who sees how vaginal the photograph looks?
I am Laslo.
Art isn't art.
There is no special spiritual significance to art in any form.
It is just decoration, whatever technique is applied.
Its nice to have pretty things to look at, or use.
Wow...my copy was free....
I might just cut & paste that to be my monitor background for a day or so - until some other artwork catches my eye.
Oh what a time we live in, when a peasant such as I can enjoy the same artwork as the nobbiest of the elite, without paying an extra penny to do so!
Wow, I'm kinda surprised at the responses here.
"Phantom" is, to my eyes, hauntingly beautiful - the right place at precisely the right time.
And if the purchaser didn't also purchase the negative with assurances that no prints or engravings had been made, then he greatly overpaid.
But thank you Prof. Althouse for showing us this work of art.
Post a Comment