Comments on: Panel Discussion: Is Photography Really Art?

By: Doodee

Doodee — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 23:04:57 +0000

Thanks for sharing

By: andrew

andrew — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:48:43 +0000

this is still a question?

By: geoffrey hutchinson

geoffrey hutchinson — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 06:16:26 +0000

OMG Photography is so boring these days! It’s all just formulaic Masters Degree bull crap.
Who really cares about your silly fake reality? Or your fake silly reality? Yes, We All have a Life, Yeah? Get a Real Subject, and Make me Feel Interested.

By: Chad

Chad — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:43:56 +0000

I just went to a panel discussion here in Philly that had the title “How photography became Arts little darling of the 20th century…” IT WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT WOMEN IN PHOTOGRAPHY! How terrible of a title is that.

By: SHANE LAVALETTE / JOURNAL » Blog Archive » Words Without Pictures

SHANE LAVALETTE / JOURNAL » Blog Archive » Words Without Pictures — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 03:07:53 +0000

[...] I briefly mentioned the launch of the web project Words Without Pictures. Now that it’s online I thought [...]

By: John

John — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 15:29:08 +0000

My question was rhetorical. If you go to this event, ask who came up with the title and topic and then throw an overripe avocado in their face.

By: Shane Lavalette

Shane Lavalette — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:14:05 +0000

I know, seriously. I think the discussion would/could still be interesting, though.

John, yes it is. Charlotte Cotton is now the head of the photo department there.

By: John

John — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:09:31 +0000

Lame. This is the new LACMA at work?

By: Christian

Christian — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 06:23:19 +0000

Worst…panel…discussion…title…EVER.