Why can't you actually take more photos of the ART. I could care less about the people standing in front of it. ???
It's because there is actually very little to look at.
true. the show wasn't so good, but there was soo many people!!
dem frames are LA-hideous.
8 times out of 10 (statistical fact), the people at an art show are more entertaining than the art itself. keep on keeping on try harder!
i've been able to figure out a sort of de facto TRYHARDER art show rating scale, I think. It goes like this: If, for a given opening, they post pictures of mostly people, then it was either a shitty show (and, therefore, the people were the most interesting thing to document) or it was a really good, packed show (where, thus, art-only shots were hard to get). It the post is a mix of art-only shots and people shots, then it falls somewhere in-between.You're welcome.
I agree with anonymous (two above), but, the sad thing is, 9 times out of 10, the homeless guy down the street is more entertaining (and generally interesting) than the people in the gallery.
Post a Comment