8x10 Photo Doesn't Qualify as Art

8x10 Photo Doesn't Qualify as Art

I posted this to my photography forum also.

Quote from an article on ABC News web site:
A framed 8-by-10-inch photo doesn't normally qualify as "art." But the same photo printed several feet wide can be striking, he says.

the quote can be found on page two of this article
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory?id=14222662

You need to be a member of Art Fair Insiders to add comments!

Join Art Fair Insiders

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • Interesting how nowhere in the article are art fairs mentioned as a source for art. It would probably be much easier to find art that way than to troll galleries. Why is that art fairs are not on the radar of most people?

     

    This weekend I met a person in my booth who was at the first art fair she had ever attended. I’d say she was in her mid 30’s. Well dressed, evidence of disposable income. She had just moved to that small town from a larger city for work, and was looking for something to do. She read about the art fair in the local paper and came. She was beside herself with excitement. Said she’d never seen so much art in her life outside a museum, “And I like it all,” she said. “I don’t know where to turn, there’s just so much wonderful stuff out here. Are there more of these somewhere?”  Obviously I did my best to clue her into possible resources, starting with my own show list.

     

    What made me think later was, how is it that she was never exposed before? How many potential customers are we missing?

  • So apparently according this "expert" all of the 8 x10 contact prints made by Edward Weston (and others) are not art. There are an awful lot of collectors who paid thousands of $ for original Weston prints who might tend to disagree.
  • An interesting tie in would be art shows that have a minimum pricing policy. Doesn't Virginia Beach have a rule that nothing can be sold for under $15?

    Larry Berman
  • I'm surprised you posted this link, Larry.  It's just the same, misinformed ideas that permeate the discount-store culture all over again.  It's sad that people actually think this way.  Art isn't about size or price, and publicly encouraging readers to try to get artists to undersell their galleries should be a crime.  And telling the public to go buy original art because it's the "hot" thing to do, and that they can do it without suspending their giant-mart aesthetic is just as wrong.  The writer feigns encouraging people to truly become educated about art, but stops short of expecting anyone to do any real work.

     

    As for 8X10 photos not being art - poppycock.  I work in 8X10, plus smaller and larger, too.  The people who believe that giant prints on canvas are the end-all, be-all of the art world are just lazy.  Instead of inspiring people to be as creative in displaying art as they are in saving a buck to aquire it, the writer is taking the "just buy something big and throw it over the couch so you never have to think about it again" approach.  The people who are attracted to and purchase my work understand that small is not only a choice but that the size of the work is important to the overall piece.  There's no point in making something huge just because you can.

    • I posted it to open a discussion, not because I believe it, which I don't. The problem with articles like thIs is That they are published in mainstream news and the general public might actually believe them.

      Larry Berman
This reply was deleted.