Digital BW, The Print

.
>
> Too often however the 'art' part of conceptual art is simply a way of
> obscuring what was not a very original, brilliant or striking idea in the
> first place. Just as, IMO, the language of some of the French semioticians
> like Derrida obscures a meaning which once disentangled doesn't stand up
to
> analysis. Compare and contrast with Wittgenstein or Barthes, who can amaze
> you with a simple sentence, just as Paul Klee can amaze you with a line.
>
> --
 I agree with you totally on this. I had a conversation with a friend
recently who is a keen amateur painter of the representational school. He
didn't think much of my street stuff, because it was 'just' a photo -
whereas his picture of roses took time and craft - all i did was click the
button. I tried explaining that it takes hours of working towards 'the'
moment, that the print takes time and craft, and that the vision to see the
moment is an 'artistic' vision. There is a balance in all this, between art
and craft, between concept and object which is almost one of dialectics with
the final piece being the synthesis. BTW my friend also didn't think much of
photoshop and digital printing :-)

Julian