Is porn art?
How has Terry survived the #MeToo movement?
>>3446807I thought he would be in jail by now with all the photos (evidence) that probably exists
>>3446851One of the issues with that sort of assault is that it’s really hard to prove to the standard required by a court of law. And in fact, the sort of assault he’s being accused of may not even technically be illegal. There’s a vast gray area between “this guy can be locked up for rape” and “this guy is a piece of shit”.
Is a urinal art? Is a blank canvas art? Is a can labeled “artist’s shit” art? How many times must this dumb question be asked? Board of plebs.
ofc porn cannot be art. it lacks its cathartic disposition as well as its intermediate synthesis and therefore simply copies the desired entity without exalting (or subliming) any cultural or orherwise repressed drive or likewise derivates.but art can be pornographic, though. there's a difference.
Art is the communication of a unique perception for the sake of further contemplation.Pornographys primary and defining purpose is sexual stimulation, it is designed with no embellishments, nothing extraordinary or unexpected. It is a tool to get you off. Art must bear the suggestion of the creator. Without that, art is void.
>>3446893This post? Art.
>>3446893>Is a urinal art? Yes. Duchamp was commenting on the academies stuffy traditionalism and appealing for a wider definition of art.>Is a blank canvas art?Yes, Kazimir Malevich and Robert Ryman both thought that blank canvases and monochromatic fields were evocative of feelings.>Is a can labeled “artist’s shit” art?Manzoni was making a deliberately provocative statement about art in the same vein as Duchamp concerning what is defined as art. His piece communicates that shocking or unpleasant content does not exclude a work from being art. Not all art is beautiful.>How many times must this dumb question be asked?Until postmodernism goes away and we can return to modernisms experimental beauty.>Board of plebs.Always and forever.
Can you wank off to art?
>>3446796Is square always a rectangle? Is a rectangle always a square?
>>3446913lol remember when you worked at the front desk of a gallery
>>3447085Society just isn't ready to grasp your nuance. Especially in a public place.
>>3446913Thanks for typing the long version>>3446920Nigger, you’re too dumb to understand we’re agreeing, memes have melted your brain
>>3447089rsim is that you?
>>3446913Ryman's canvasses weren't blank, and he didn't do field paintings.
>>3447043In rehab it's all I had.
The question becomes: is the pornographer an artist? And, furthermore, is Uncle Terry a pornographer?I say that the pornographer can be an artist but it is not necessary (cf. all the east european factory porn), but also that Terry is no pornographer.
the guy in op's pic looks like Joseph Seed
>>3447252verging on semantics, wheels spinning on its edge, but technically correct
>>3447266looks like a right sicko whoever he is
>>3446796Imagine fucking COLOMBIAN hookers while binging on coke, meth and every other kind of degeneracy known to men and being considered a visionary for taking photos at the time.
>>3447276Semantics is the stuff of criticism, old boy.
>>3447368And jesus wept
>>3446796Porn is not art but some art is porn.
>>3446796>Is porn art?Just look at any BLACKED scene.
>>3447590Xart had good production value back in the day too
>>3446913>>3446920>Yes. Duchamp was commenting on the academies stuffy traditionalism and appealing for a wider definition of art.Oh no, it's retarded.https://youtu.be/bHw4MMEnmpc?t=373
>>3446804because the jews worship his level of degeneracy
>>3446796The definition of pornography is literally ' sexually explicit writing, images of film whose only purpose is sexual arousal and has no artistic merit' so categorically, no. Porn is the worst thing that ever happened to the world. Future civilizations will talk about it in the way we talk about Rome's lead pipes and conversion to Christianity. Every single person behind the industry has the main aim of subverting and destroying the wills of individuals and then the fabric of society as a whole.
>>3446913Everything is art, cool, every shit I take is a piece of art, a child's scribblings are equal in worth to the masters of renaissance and enlightenment and fuck you for saying otherwise. Nothing is real, everything is anything you want it to be. It's really super smart to just break down meanings until nothing has any. Bravo, you've participated in the post-modernist fracturing of the greatest civilization that ever existed.
>>3447748Scruton is a boss. Ironically one of the only real radicals left in the art world because he dares to say that the emperor has no clothes.
>>3447762Everything can be art ≠ everything is artGo back to your corner, pleb.
>>3447775Okay, I'll make sure to bless my turds with a signature then. Then they're magically art. "Not all art is beautiful" and not all biology concerns life, not all cooking makes food. You people are ruining the world, your snobbishness (entirely undeserved, but I digress) doesn't save you from that. But go ahead, keep believing you're the smartest man on the sinking ship, your big fat marvelous patrician brain tastes the same to the fishes.
Fuck, I remember when I used to think like this retard back in college.>>3447775
>>3447779>now I realize that the one thing that really defines the whole sphere art is rigid, formal rules that must never be broken. There are certain categories of things that can be Art, not all of those the things even in those categories can be Art, and anything that doesn’t fit those extremely narrow definitions simply isn’t art.
>>3447780Now you get it. Welcome to adulthood.
>>3447778>>3447779>>3447781All you are hating but you wish you thought of it first I'm just out there doing what I love and you're here hating what does that say about you? What does it say about me? All I do is come to look at other people's work and post gentle words of encouragement not just rage shit on anything that falls outside of the fold. All you care about is posting stupid tumblr esthetic regurgitated crap and jerk each other off over film. But think about this do you love photography or just ganging up on people for no reason and just looking all smirk I noticed none of you are published. I wonder. Have any of you been published in gallery? I have. Have any of you been featured on 500px front page? I have. Have any of you sold a print at all? Have your works been featured in a popular public gallery? I have.Can any of you use the zoning system to get a perfect exposure out of the cam w no process? I can. Can any of you make a pinhole camera from scratch then process the film and enlarge it and make prints? Are you fucking kidding me? You think I don't know I will get some flak when pushing the boundaries of what photography stands for?
photography is not art
>>3447829Finally. Someone other than myself posts this pasta.
>>3446804He didn't he got blacklisted by Conde Nast
>>3447748this still does not convince me as the urinal took skill to make and has interesting curves.
Uncle Terry hasn't done anything as awful as what the former editor of Shutterbug magazine, Bob shell, already did. For those who don't remember, Bob shell was doing bondage photographs with a drug-addicted model and due to his negligence accidentally killed her. Material is a scumbag to don't get me wrong you should be taken out behind the film Shack in the mall and beaten with a lead pipe on his legs until he gets the idea he's a scumbag to
>>3449183You ever read about his trial tho? The 'photography expert' they brought in who said you couldnt read exif data without downloading a super-special program from canon, (that he was given specially for the murder case by a canon rep who later couldnt be identified or found). Also that the time on the exif were wrong, (expert said they couldnt be) because the time/date on the guys camera wasn't set. And finally the coroner who testified that the girl was dead in the last pictures because the rope marks on her skin (from tight ropes pinching for several hours) hadnt faded within 35mins or something. Not to mention the same coroner had given expert opinion on 2 other cases that were later over-ruled by better experts apparently.The Bob Shell guy is definitely a scumbag, but holy shit the entire trial was a mockery. It was the first time I realized how bad the US justice system is, followed a couple of years later in my area with the Kids For Cash scandal. Made me pray I never end up in front of an American judge.
>>3447725lol, what the fuck is this from? BLACKEDcon?
>>3446851evidence of what? when he does these shoots the model sign contracts showing whats in the shoot and they consent to it.
>>3449908not exactly in what way? He was a huge photographer and he had girls lining up for shoots. The majority knew what was going to happen there.if they didn't sign explicit contracts that showed what would happen and release forms after, then all the models shouting abuse would have a case and could jail him. Terry was a huge photographer and I'm sure he knew the legal side of it
>>3449950I'm pretty sure for a high profile photographer they have contracts showing exactly what will happen. especially for a guy that made straight up porn. If he didn't, it would be super easy for a model to say he raped them on shoot. There would proof right there with the photos released on the internet. That's the only reason he isn't in jail. It would be a clear case, just ask any lawyer
>>3449949They did not sign release forms saying that he would jerk off and cum in their eyes, choke them, etc.
-A Conversation Between Two Worlds-by Gavin Mclnnes and Olivier ZahmNo art book would be complete without an analysis of the work by an erudite art critic. Since Terry Richardson is unique in his ability to take high art to jaded teenagers while simultaneously forcing the fashion and art elite to appreciate the dirtiest shit you’ve ever seen, we selected critics to represent both sides of the Richardson enigma.In this corner we have the irreverent and retarded Gavin Mclnnes of New York’s Vice Magazine. His cultural opponent is the sophisticated Parisian editor of Purple Magazine, Olivier Zahm. Can a conversation between these two learned academics help us understand the genius that is Terry Richardson? Read and decide. ==================================Gavin: One of my favorite things about Terry’s photos is the imperfections. I like seeing a zit on a girl’s ass. I think everyone does. It reminds me of that Thomas Jefferson quote, “There is not a truth existing which I fear, or would want unknown to the whole world.”Olivier: Because Terry is shooting in an instinctive, immediate, almost physical way, he catches the smallest detail as a force, as a proof that you cannot control life. His pictures demonstrate how life and desire and sex are stronger than the typical visual construction the fashion industry insists on. The fact that he is working for this very industry adds another crucial layer. The imperfections in his photographs help take down the standard of glamour and high fashion. But more than imperfections, to me, one of my favorite things in his photos is the perfection of the frame: he is cutting the reality in a sharp, definitive, brilliant line, extracting the moment and movement of life from its vital flux. This is brilliant and unique. No other photographer is sharper in this sense.
>>3453032Gavin: I never thought of the framing thing. The way he’ll zoom in on a pair of tits so close you can see there’s kind of some hairs on them. I was interviewed about him for one of these corny liberal modern sex shows and they were implying that Terry was a feminist because he was making “ugly” beautiful. l had to clarify that most of these women are still total fucking knockouts.This isn’t some lesbian anarchist collective. They’re still the same supermodels that are on every other page of Vogue, only here, they’re making coffee with rubber boots on, or putting a tit on a watermelon. ln a way thats more subversive because you never see people like this portrayed so honestly. So yeah, you get Dennis Hopper with no blemishes removed, and then, on top of that, he has this weird close up that drives home how unusual the shot is even more. lt’s a double whammy…Olivier: Let’s be honest. Terry’s pictures are definitely not feminist. They are as politically “incorrect” as pictures get. He is not glamorizing women’s power, beauty or strength. He is more portraying female beauty from a male perspective. Instead of trying to celebrate femininity they are focusing on the use of masculinity (his own subjective view of women) within fashion iconography.Gavin: Most of the critics that hate him (I’m picturing sexless, lonely, thirty-something women with sandals) say hes just fucking girls, but with a camera in his hand.
>>3453034Olivier: I have heard women say Terry’s work is just an expression of the typical male obsession for sex and a celebration of the camera as an extension of his phallus, but this is a very reductive definition of his work.First, his pictures are a form of visual humor. Second, he is always sharing real emotion with his model. They are not objects or sexual props. The photos aren’t even about that. They are an experiment, an examination of the interaction between a photographer and his models in this age of media, fashion, self-obsession and narcissistic paranoia. He keeps pushing these dialectic structures (man/woman, photographer/model,phallic/non-phallic) as far as he can until the difference between “art” and “fashion” becomes totally blurred.You don’t know what is real and what is constructed. When the critics make it a competition and become obsessed with choosing the winner (the photographer or the model) they make it so ideological it becomes uninteresting. Terry’s experimentation is about subverting this dual structure and documenting an intimate relationship with the model. Where can he take it? Where can he take it today? What are the limits of the game? What will the viewers call fashion and what will they call art? Will they reject the images entirely and censor him? That is the experiment.Gavin: It’s also reductive to assume it’s all about shock value. I remember when the Sex Pistols were on Bill Grundy (host of Thames Today, a London television show of the 1970s) and he accused them of swearing just to shock people. They pointed out that this is the way they talk every day. There’s no premeditation about it. They were just being honest.
>>3453035Olivier: That is a crucial element of this whole thing. His pictures are totally honest. They don’t hide anything. They don’t pretend to be what they are not. In this sense they are a political statement too. It’s not pornographic because it reveals how the rest of photography today is pornographic. By having these images in a commercial context they act as a Trojan horse that transcends the original format. They sneak the viewer a moment of truth.Gavin: When I look at art I don’t give a shit about the artist’s lifestyle but Terry is an exception to that. The whole dichotomy of lowbrow and high art comes from the ups and downs of his fucked up past.Half his life is wealthy snobberdom. Hes the son of a fashion photographer and was born in New York but moved to Paris at an early age. It was all celebrities and travel and art until his parents’ marriage exploded after his father had an affair with a 17-year-old Anjelica Huston.The other half of his life was about being dirt poor and playing in esoteric punk bands, getting addicted to drugs with no family around to care. It’s a weird combination of homeless orphan and uptown rich kid that you rarely see in an artist. Is he where he is today because of luck or was it his destiny?Olivier: It’s a hard question to answer. Sometimes the images are light and have no purpose other than to amuse. Sometimes they are profound and portray love as a fissure of pain and murder. He is at once a careless street kid and a misanthropic Lacanien. They float in the limbo of rapport and are essentially a documentation of the gap between person and portrait. ls it hatred or an irrepressible jouissance? I don’t know.
>>3446804He hasn't. From Wikipedia:Since 2001, Richardson has been accused by multiple models of sexually assaulting or exploiting them during fashion shoots. In 2017, brands and magazines that had worked with Richardson in the past began distancing themselves from him, and said they would no longer employ him.]In January 2018, it was reported that Richardson is under investigation by the NYPD's Special Victims Squad in relation to multiple sexual assault allegations; this investigation is ongoing.
>>3453036Gavin: I just like laughing at poo and fantasizing about fucking the hot girls. It’s the only kind of porn I can enjoy these days.Olivier: But Terry’s pictures are never pornographic.Gavin: Oh.
>>3453039Olivier: Pornography is the way sex is commercialized by a repressive machine in an isolated ghetto of pictures (on the net, in magazines, films, etc.). Pornography is an industry of repression, a collective enterprise of profit. It’s a visual industry which kidnaps sex as a product for frustrated men.Terry is actually working against pornography because he is reintroducing desire, seduction and playful sexuality, in real life, in real time, in the studio. He is photographing sex as a real interaction between him and his model. He is not playing the scenario of sexual pornographic control and alienation. He is part of the game. We can see one arm of Terry with his watch, one hand, sometimes his body, sometimes his penis, etc. He refuses the stereotypical function of the porn picture. By placing himself in the picture he is suppressing the illusion of domination and joining the frame. It should be noted however that Terry is not trying to demystify sexuality. He’s just lightening up the whole subject and creating a more equal rapport between photographer and model. A photographer going in front of the camera is not enough, just like the factory owner from the Pasolini film ‘Theorem’ deciding to join the workers is not enough. What is required is a sacrifice like in every film of Pasolini. A sacrifice of the artist who knows that he must sacrifice himself to the system, the fashion system, the pornographic system. The artist must face it with no fear.Pornography is not only fake, stupid and dangerous, it does not exist. It’s a pure construction, an illusion. Terry’s pictures are the opposite of that. They are deconstructing this faux veneer. That is why it’s so infuriating to hear the press call his work “porn chic” or “porn glamour”.Gavin: Yeah.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D2HCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.4Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern1083Focal Length (35mm Equiv)52 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2004:09:14 06:28:42Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/5.0Exposure ProgramManualExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceFlashFlashFlash, Return DetectedFocal Length35.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3600Image Height2400RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastSoftSaturationNormalSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknown
'Terry always did his own thing,' says Stephen Male, recalling those early days. 'I remember when the contact sheets came in for the Levi's shoot we did, every single one would feature a photograph of the model with her top off. I remember thinking, "How did he do that?" I mean, it wasn't really what was required for the shoot. Then it became Terry's thing. It seems almost quaint and old-fashioned now that we'd find it questionable. But that's fashion for you. Once somebody pushes the envelope, it doesn't take long for taboo images to become acceptable. Plus, fashion needs people like Terry; it needs to feel it has an edge all the time.' Terry, unsurprisingly, concurs. 'Hell, somebody's gotta come up once in a while and say bollocks to all that mainstream, glamour stuff.'
"Soon, the shoots got wilder, and often Terry's assistants, Seth and Keiji, had to be on hand to take the actual pictures. 'I always say I make pictures rather than take pictures,' explains Terry."“The goal is to get the best image possible, and if that means that somebody standing off to the side gets a more candid shot than me, then I’m all for it,” Richardson laughs. “Which doesn’t always make my clients happy if I’m working on a job, but the way I see it, it really doesn’t matter who is actually pressing the shutter, because they’re my images. It’s a picture that I’ve created. I don’t work off lights and angles; I work off emotions. A mood that I create.”
>>3453042they're talking about this as if it's a good thing
=================================John Waters:I heard that Terry Richardson was doing the photo shoot for this piece. Did you see his book, Terryworld? Did you look through it? And are you going to show your dick in this photo shoot?Johnny Knoxville:Uh, Terry might already have some photos of that! [both laugh]John Waters:What luck for the editors of GENRE! Well, Terry’s is a great book. He always shows his own dick! It seems like he’s the only photographer who, judging from his book, shows up nude with a hard-on to take your picture. That’s a refreshing new twist, I guess, in a shoot.Johnny Knoxville:Yeah, he’s got a monster cock on him, for sure. And his assistant, Keiichi, will stand there with his cock out, playing with it, while Terry’s shooting.==========================https://web.archive.org/web/20060117030549/http://www.genremagazine.com/2005/7-1/magazine/content/knoxville.cfm
>>3453070>That’s a refreshing new twist,huhuhu penishow refreshing
>>3453073that is NOT true art!
steve O ~""In the summer of 2004, I was in the back of a cab, riding through New York City, when my cell phone rang. It was Knoxville. “Hey, I’m at Terry Richardson’s studio,” he told me. “He wants to do a bukkake shoot and we’re just a few cocks short. You game?” Bukkake, for the uninitiated, is when several dudes shoot their loads on one girl. Of course I was game. Terry Richardson is a famous—or, perhaps, infamous—photographer known for his extremely risqué, sexually graphic photo shoots. I’d met him the year before when he shot press photos for the Lollapalooza tour. We’d hit it off pretty well. When I arrived at his studio that afternoon, Knoxville immediately made it clear that he, personally, wanted no part of this photo shoot. When Terry explained the concept to me, I understood why. He wanted a photo of me pulling a girl’s hair while I shot a load on her face and someone else pointed a gun at her head. Knoxville later told me he had no idea a gun would be involved. Regardless, the whole thing sounded fine to me. The girl in question was a young-looking model—I was assured that she wasn’t too young—and soon she went to work giving me a blow job.""
>>3453077""I had her hair in my hand but having someone holding a gun to her head was really throwing me off. As I’ve said, I’m quick on the draw, but something about a dude holding a gun was not particularly arousing. We devised a solution: once I reached the point of no return, so to speak, I’d call for the gun to be brought into the frame. So that’s how I came to be yelling “Gun! Gun! Gun!” one beautiful summer afternoon in Manhattan as some dude brought a pistol to the head of a young model whose face I was about to cum on. I know: classy. Later that same night I met a gorgeous Danish model named May Andersen. Knoxville knew her somehow and brought me along to her birthday party at the Gansevoort Hotel. He introduced us, we got fucked up together, and I spent that night with her in her hotel room. May was only twenty-two but already a reasonably big deal in the modeling world. She’d been in Victoria’s Secret catalogs and two Sports Illustrated swimsuit issues. We didn’t really have a ton in common beyond the fact that we both liked to party—hard—but we ended up dating for the next six months or so. Looking back on it, I probably wasn’t ready for a serious relationship at that point in my life. I mean, I don’t know if the fact that just a few hours earlier I’d been getting my cock sucked by a complete stranger while someone held a gun to her head automatically meant that my relationship with May was doomed to fail, but it probably didn’t help.""
Lee Carter: Is Terry Richardson a New Yorker or a So. Cal. kind of guy?Terry Richardson: I think it’s not where you’re from, it’s where you are, and right now I’m in New York. I feel like a New Yorker.LC: Do you have another place in New York, or do you call this studio home?TR: This is it—home, everything. I like how you refer to it as the studio. The French call it le studio. A lot’s gone on this couch, let me tell you.LC: Uh, should I get up?TR: No. Just kidding. Sort of.LC: Do you still skateboard?TR: The last time I went skateboarding I was hit by a cab. I got a bruised hip and my face was cut up. I realized I shouldn’t be skating around the streets of New York City. Safety first. Now I have an indoor skateboard.LC: You skate in here?TR: Yeah, on my little skateboard, the best $6 I ever spent in a thrift store. We have naked skateboarding contests. That’ll be the concept for a future ad campaign, naked skateboarding.LC: Naked skateboarding would be one of your tamer concepts. Has there been a time when you felt you’d gone too far? Too explicit?TR: No, but there are a lot of pictures that have never run.
=========================================================================Lee Jeans' controversial "Lolita" ad poster for spring-summer 2006 has been found acceptable by the Advertising Standards Board.Shot by renowned US photographer Terry Richardson, the advertisement - shown in locations including Toorak Road, South Yarra - featured the standard cliches of the soft-porn aesthetic: lollipop being sucked, breast half-exposed, legs spread.Groups including Australian Childhood Foundation had expressed outrage about the advertisement."The clothes can hardly be seen," wrote one complainant to the advertising industry's self-regulator. "This type of ad demeans women."But while the board acknowledged "there were sexual overtones in the pose, and her consumption of the lollipop", it said that a degree of sexuality in advertising was not unacceptable."The board (notes) that the woman is over 18, is fully clothed in attire that is fashionable amongst young women for summer, and that there is no nudity," its determination said."The board also (notes) that consumption of this style of lollipop is now common amongst people over 18."Lee is believed to paid Richardson, 41, $200,000 to shoot its spring-summer campaign - roughly 10 times what an Australian photographer would earn for the same campaign. If it was paying the provocateur for controversy, its investment was rewarded.The denim company described its campaign as a "tongue in cheek, kitschy and over-exaggerated portrayal of classic denim poses".http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/lees-lolita-ok/2006/10/04/1159641365538.htmlhttp://forums.thefashionspot.com/showpost.php?p=2658955&postcount=247=====================================================================>$58 million a year:https://petapixel.com/2013/08/15/terry-richardson-says-he-stands-to-lose-hundreds-of-thousands-in-gaga-case/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------“My goal was to put together a calendar that you could jerk off to,” says fashion photographer Terry Richardson of the new calendar he shot for Supreme. “I know I would jerk off to this, so I feel like I’ve succeeded.” At the shoot in LA, what started out as a slightly saucy experience turned into three days of cum shots, cocaine and cockfights. “Things got a bit out of hand by the end,” admits Terry. “The woman producing the shoot got freaked out and had to leave. I think every person there fucked someone. It was intense.”The limited-edition calendar was art directed by Andrew Richardson of Richardson magazine. It will be coming out in November and will be available for $50 from Supreme (USA, Japan), Hideout (London) and Colette (Paris).---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TERRY: At one point we were totally broke and I tracked down some of his old negatives at French Vogue and places like that - he had none of them - and I remember going to Bruce Weber and Steven Meisel to sell them prints. Bruce was very kind. He said he'd always loved my father's pictures, and he bought some. And Steven did too. BRUCE: Don't you have a Robert Downey Jr. story?TERRY: We were like nine or ten and we smoked weed and played "Cream the Carrier."BRUCE: What's that?TERRY: You know, you run around and tackle each other and get the person into a position until they say "Uncle." I didn't see him again until years later, I was 22 and running these underground clubs in LA - Viva La Revolution and Dr. T's - and he came into one of them.BRUCE: Where were those clubs?TERRY: Downtown. MacArthur Park and below was where all the cool underground clubs were. The '80s in L.A. were really amazing and decadent.BRUCE: So-Cal punk is legendary.TERRY: Yeah, I saw The Germs and Black Flag when I was a little kid.BRUCE: Were you around when Penelope Spheeris was shooting The Decline of Western Civilization?TERRY: Yeah, I went to the premier at Graumann's Chinese. The police barricaded off Hollywood Boulevard because they thought there would be a riot — which there was. But Decline, man ... I mean, no disrespect to New York Hardcore, but the SoCal punk scene was the scene as far as I'm concerned, with all those real cute Huntington Beach surfer skinhead boys.BRUCE: And you were in the band Doggie Style — you caught the tail end of Doggie Style. Were you on Doggie Style II, with the Led Zeppelin cover?TERRY: Just after that. I was in SSA before that, and a band called Baby Fist from Ventura. I was in a lot of garage bands, I had a lot of fun.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width960Image Height1280
>>3453095>$58 million a yearI'm calling bullshit on this figure. I know he's very well compensated but it seems like some article cooked up some random figure based on nothing and then a bunch of blogs ran with it (as is often the case with celebrity net worth related news.) I'm guessing his actual yearly pay is closer to $5.8M.
>>3453160>>3453095There's no way he makes (or ever made) 58 million a year.
Not really. I would consider porn the equivalent to watching some sports highlights. Erotica, though, I would say is art. The difference? In the words of Robin Williams, "erotica is using a feather, pornography is using the whole chicken". Thinl about it, feathers can be used as art. But chickens? Now that would be interesting...
/p/ is the worst board
>>3453297actually \pol\ is
>>3453206>proof?My only proof is common sense...
>>3453650bruh, Uncle has enough squilla to grab the GG Allin tee with some of GG's feces https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IA282wVgAV4Uncle is definitely ballin!!!!!!!!!!!
has anyone bought this yet:http://www.penguinrandomhouseretail.com/book/?isbn=9780847846061any good?click on "Look inside"
>>3446907>Art is the communication of a unique perception for the sake of further contemplation.>Pornographys primary and defining purpose is sexual stimulation, it is designed with no embellishments, nothing extraordinary or unexpected. It is a tool to get you off. Art must bear the suggestion of the creator. Without that, art is void.Mann & Hamilton??
>>3446847who shot that?
>>3446873fuck off pagan
>>3446913do you believe that yourself or did you just remember it from a book or something.
>>3454008the text is from the holy bible.
>>3453895did mr West really vote TRUMP?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeMicrotekCamera ModelSM 9800XL 9800Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image Width5745Image Height3724Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Compression SchemeUncompressedPixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution250 dpiVertical Resolution250 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2012:04:16 18:49:14Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1300Image Height843
>>3450041Yeah well, it's fucking Terry though. They knew exactly what they were up to.It's almost like trying to sue Ron Jeremy for making lewd comments off-camera, after he fucked you five ways to Pluto and back on-camera.Also: pretty sure Terry's model release forms included... specifics... that most of us won't need.
>>3446847the biopic wasn't bad aside from>how do you shoot?>lol i dunno get yr cock out time to aids also my brother sucks
>>3447296who did this? have more?
>>3453099>my dick was so big I could step on its foreskini'll be damned, ol' crazy pants has a package
>>3453888robert maplethorpe, self portrait
>>3454280looks like araki
>>3454299That's like saying a porn actress isn't a prostitute.
>>3448851really makes me think
anyone think Uncle fooled around with trump's daughter??[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeRICOHCamera ModelGR DIGITAL 2Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.4Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2009:07:30 17:32:33Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/2.4Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.4Brightness-0.6 EVExposure Bias-0.3 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashFlash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.90 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1500Image Height1125Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormal
>>3447829>All you are hating but you wish you thought of it first I'm just out there doing what I love and you're here hating what does that say about you? What does it say about me?>All I do is come to look at other people's work and post gentle words of encouragement not just rage shit on anything that falls outside of the fold.>All you care about is posting stupid tumblr esthetic regurgitated crap and jerk each other off over film.>But think about this do you love photography or just ganging up on people for no reason and just looking all smirk I noticed none of you are published. I wonder.>Have any of you been published in gallery? I have.>Have any of you been featured on 500px front page? I have.>Have any of you sold a print at all? Have your works been featured in a popular public gallery? I have.>Can any of you use the zoning system to get a perfect exposure out of the cam w no process? I can.>Can any of you make a pinhole camera from scratch then process the film and enlarge it and make prints?>Are you fucking kidding me? You think I don't know I will get some flak when pushing the boundaries of what photography stands for?yangang!
Is there any scan of araki’s stuff?
>>3446796>you will never be Uncle Terry
>>3446796>Is porn art?most of the time
>>3446796No porn is not art. erotica is art. They can sometimes look simmilar but are different in purpose and composition. I do own some of lary Clark's work just for reference.
>>3446796Jacques Bourboulon is pure art
One day, Uncle Terry will shove his cock in the wrong hole, and a jealous guy will tear him to bits.
>>3456390who's this qt3.14?
>>3446796No it's consumable media witch is why it's so mass produced. Now some pornstars/producers could be considered artisans of their craft
>>3446796>Is porn art?is this art:https://licensing.artpartner.com/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=2UYSN2BA6VJC?
Porn isn't art.Trolling is a art.
>>3446796only in the 1800's
>>3460719every media is consumable. books are a consumable media and they´re mass produced, literature is still considered art.honestly i think everything can be art if somebody considers it to be art. But just because something is art, it doesn´t mean that it´s automatically sacred, or even good, there´s plenty of shit art out there
>>3463009>honestly i think everything can be art if somebody considers it to be art.This is the dumbest, most useless definition of art possible. It's to the point where there shouldn't even be a word.
>>3463033he probably needs a definition from a dictionary or by some famous philosopher, so he can quote it and feel smart
>>3463033Do you disagree that that definition is useless?
>>3463059then give us a better one fagott
>>3463070So you agree that it's useless?
>>3446796Is X-Art art?
>>3463568There's an ebook mega with some araki in here, browse the archives.
>>3463793Cant fucking find it. I think im mentally challenged or somethin
>>3446804He hawks his shitty t-shirts every day but no one buys them because even they recognize brand infringement
>>3464931link to proof?i want to buy 3
>>3453032>>3453034>>3453035>>3453036>>3453039>>3453041>>3453042>>3453045>think of myself as a man of the arts>tfw too stupid to understand art literature
>>344927435 minutes is often not enough time for rope marks to fade.
>>3447194It depends on what your definition of “is” is
>>3466458>named “Mr. Ogre”>knows how long it takes for rope marks to fade after a bondage shootDid I buy a Nikon d7000 from you a few years back?
>>3453032This is wonderful. It is actually a printed foreword to the Tashchen special "Terryworld", which I own.>>3453059It is neither good nor bad, objectively. Terry's work is interesting because each photo is so individually subjective. When possible art should always be considered separately from the artist - with Terry that is simply not possible, he actually forces you to feel one way or another about his work.Or you know, read the article, try to stay objective, and understand that your feelings dont matter.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelX100SCamera SoftwareAperture 3.5.1Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2013:03:27 09:26:49Exposure Time1/34 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/2.0Exposure Bias1.3 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashFlash, CompulsoryFocal Length23.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>3453095>Joe Davola is gonna put the Kibosh on me!!
>>3455990>>3463793>>3464362I have some rare araki I could be convinced to upload if there was a good hosting site. I'm interested in that mega of scans though if anyone knows where to find it.
Art![EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 7.0 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2010:09:03 14:25:07Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1280Image Height720
>>3446913The urinal is only fit for what it was built for, pissing in. Duchamp started a movement of faggots with no skill writing pretentious garbage about other garbage to get shekels.
>>3448851He didn't make it though.
>>3469298>I have some rare araki I could be convinced to upload if there was a good hosting siteimgur?
>>3446796I've never seen any that was "art."
>>3447089remember sucking my dick in the back?
>>3447748Scruton can fuck off. His definition of what art is is priggish and defensive. Hes from the same school as Berger and Robert Hughes - grumbling bastards who want to reduce art down to mere hand skills. Duchamp freed us of that - that's WHY critics still laud him. Art isn't just about how you communicate, its also about WHAT you communicate. Balancing the two creates good art, and it can be prejudiced in both directions, but neither should be excluded by these tired hags of criticism.
>>3471245I like how you just dismissed all consequent modern art as people with no skill looking for money. Dude all artists EVER only train to meet a current standard so they could make money. The artists we lift up are the ones who we could potentially believe didnt make art just for money. Even though they did. Artists who "just do it for the art" die alone, poor and unrecognised.
>>3476836while mostly true, that probably doesn't mean what you think it means.
>>3476836well, yes and no. If you can't define what art is then nothing can be art. I could say everything is Gerhurgelfarts but if no one has a baseline definition, or even an abstract idea, of what that means then no one gives a fuck.As I wrote earlier>Art is the communication of a unique perception for the sake of further contemplation.This is the most basic, all-encompassing, brass tacks definition I have ever entertained. I'm sure others will differ, but this has always worked for me.
>>3476846>Cindy ShermanShe's an excellent example of why mens art sells for more than women's. Women's art tends to be introvert and mens art tends to be extrovert. Think of how many famous women artists either focus on themselves or exclusively on womens bodies, or on the woes of being a woman.Cindy Sherman, Frieda Kahlo, Tracy Emin, Tamara De Lempicka, Sarah Lucas, Le Brun, Jenny Saville, the list goes on and on...They all focus on women's emotions and self image. Men, on the other hand, tend to ignore themselves and visualise the world around them, which is pleasurable for both genders.Shermans fame comes from her tendency to portray both sexes. She appeals to women because of her constant "unmasking" of different personalities, which is a common identity problem among young women.
>>3477171>Women's art tends to be introvert and mens art tends to be extrovert.Nah, it's more women's art tends to not be art but political propaganda, which isn't to say one should avoid politics in art, but you need to actually remember to make some art in your propaganda.
>>3477172The oldest 'art' has political agenda you stupid retard.You think those mosaics from 1000 BCE Greece wasnt about politics? Or that prehistoric structures wasn't about displaying your tribal power (only cohesive factions could waste energy on making megastructures when everyone was gathering nuts)t. Someone who actually went to college
>>3478314>which isn't to say one should avoid politics in art, but you need to actually remember to make some art in your propaganda.Must have been a football school considering your level of reading comprehension.
>>3478326No you retard. All art is political. thats what you dont get you stupid moron.I get that you never went to college because you're too fucking stupid, but dont even argue because you're embarassing yourself
>>3478327With your college degree, please point out where I said art can't be political.
>>3478328>Nah, it's more women's art tends to not be art but political propagandaLiterally all art is political. Why even are you using the metric of politcs in art as means of an insult?Just kill yourself. you're an idiot. You never went to college thats why youre so stupid. Your parents hate you and wish you were someone else
>>3478329And if you learned that periods are where sentences end, then you'd realize that I was saying that it tends to be pure propaganda with no artistic merit. Now if you want to make the case that all propaganda (and by extension advertisement) is art, feel free and I'll sit back and laugh at you.
>>3478329>>3478327I found the feminist.
>>3478330>>3478331Lol idgaf. I went to college and im smarter than both of you. Have sex you losers.>>3478330Also you stupid brainlet, you haven't even defined art. I can cite 20+ philosophers on what art is but you've already contradicted yourself. If we were in a university you'd get laughed at for being retarded.>b-but propaganda cant be art!Oh you naive poor fool. Tell me, what is art?
>>3478332>samefagging this poorly>>b-but propaganda cant be art!Haven't said anything close to that.Is it a basketball school?...you know that Community College doesn't count as university, right?
>>3478333Lmfao. Nah I went to two universities in Europe, we dont have shity community colleges here. So tell me, massive retard who doesnt even define art to support his arguments, what is art?Im waiting you moron
>>3478334I'm still waiting for you to show me where I said art can't be political and that propaganda can't be art.
>>3478335>le circular pedantic argumentCringe
>>3478336>le claims intelligence but completely misses basic syntaxBigger cringe.You can't read well enough for me to bother having any kind of worthwhile discussion with.>inb4 reposting that image with the bottom circledYeah, it's not name calling when you have actively proven twice already that you're incapable of parsing pretty straightforward sentences.
>>3478339>arguing syntaxyou realize literally no one above the 12th grade gives a shit about this? every great philosopher makes mistakes on periods, commas and abbreviation but no one gives a fuck, because the argument is what matters. An argument is something you dont have ,because you never went to college. You're an idiot and your parents hate you.>b-b-b-b-but you didnt write the comma!No one, and i mean no one in university gives a fuck. You should try going there. Oh no actually we dont want you, you're too stupid
>>3478341wew, you're seriously shit at this reading thing.
>>3478344nah mate, you've derailed the entire argument in search for commas. In university no one gives a shit. You're a moron, thats why you never went to college
>>3478345>commasFYI, punctuation isn't syntax, but sure thing Mr. University Man.
op, howard stern 1989!
>>3447748might as well have posted a prager u vid.
>>3454460Jesse Helms LOVES this photo.
>>3446796No it's Porn.
Is photography art?
>>3453098wow any link to these shots?
>>3453032Imagine thinking Gavin McInnes has anything worthwhile to say
>>3484714found the libshit
>>3446893Are you in my highschool culture class or what?