Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic

helix7 · Joined: 24 Apr 2007 Posts: 1789 Location: New Jersey

This does put an interesting spin on the "what is art" question. The snapshots they're exhibiting wouldn't get any interest from any gallery otherwise, but because they're stolen, that somehow makes them "art". It's an interesting step in another direction. The usual question stems from the notion that anyone could throw anything at a canvas and it could be called art. This scenario creates the idea that it's art because of the way in which it was obtained, and not because of what it is.

Which I don't necessarily agree with. And it's a slippery slope. If these nuckleheads happened upon the hard drive of a really good photographer, would they then assume that they have the right to display that person's work in a more traditional setting? Do some nice prints, frame them, and call it a show?

Likewise, the slippery slope could encourage other would-be "artists" to document their own criminal endeavors and call that art as well. I can see it just escalating in terms of risk just to make the exhibit more appealing. Scaling an ancient ruin to chip off a piece of a sculpture or something. We certainly don't need the suggestion that taking a piece off an existing work of art can be lucrative and will go unpunished.

The photo of the "artists" does say a lot about them, though. The guy especially. He dresses like a child. Seems he still has the mentality of one as well.

iris42 · Joined: 04 Feb 2010 Posts: 625