Canadian photo could set record price
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: You likee digitar camela? Come to Happy Lucky Electronicssite!
Next: You likee digitar camela? Come to Happy Lucky Electronics site!
From: whisky-dave on 21 Apr 2010 08:31 "Nervous Nick" <nervous.nick(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:103af738-4eb1-4432-8dc1-8bb9344746fd(a)b33g2000yqc.googlegroups.com... On Apr 20, 1:03 pm, George Kerby <ghost_top...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On 4/20/10 12:43 PM, in article > WImdnfpeYZ1CelDWnZ2dnUVZ_jidn...(a)giganews.com, "Frank ess" > > > > <fr...(a)fshe2fs.com> wrote: > > > Tzortzakakis Dimitris wrote: > >> ? "Bruce" <docnews2...(a)gmail.com> ?????? ??? ?????? > >>news:o9krs5p6muj0b1fk6c427j440utu6p5aie(a)4ax.com... > >>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:38:14 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" > >>> <dha...(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: > > >>>> Now, there's a payday ... > > >>>>http://www.edmontonjournal.com/entertainment/Photo+worth+million+word... > >>>> 503/story.html > > >>> So many words, yet no sign of the image that is being discussed. > >>> :-( > >> Probably, they will put it in a gallery where you'll have to pay an > >> entrance fee to see it, or it will end in a private collection... > > >http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/lot_details.aspx?intObjectID=5315268 > > A million bucks for a snapshot?!? > > I'm not 'buying' it... }Exactly my sentiment. Well I'd buy it if I knew I could sell it at a profit, but I don't know anyone daft enough. }The image contains zero compelling attributes and quite a few annoying }ones. }It's not even a very good snapshot. }I had to check the date on that to make sure it wasn't 1 April. }Sheesh. I know what you mean, I know someone doing a MSc in photo illustrations I bet they can give me an academic reason why it's worth so much. -- YOP...
From: N on 21 Apr 2010 08:52 "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote in message news:q%izn.2154$z%6.905(a)edtnps83... > Now, there's a payday ... > > http://www.edmontonjournal.com/entertainment/Photo+worth+million+words/2927503/story.html > I want to see the next photo taken. The one when Thing got up and slapped him in the face. -- N
From: Peter on 21 Apr 2010 09:06 "Bruce" <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:0hits5doom82uos6pjqh8irod24anejdkn(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:42:27 -0400, tony cooper > <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >>On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:08:01 +0100, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> >>wrote: >> >>>On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:38:14 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" >>><dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: >>>> >>>>Now, there's a payday ... >>>> >>>>http://www.edmontonjournal.com/entertainment/Photo+worth+million+words/2927503/story.html >>>> >>> >>> >>>So many words, yet no sign of the image that is being discussed. :-( >> >>An apt description of your posts. So many words, but no sign of a >>photograph. > > > Long may it remain so! If I ever get desperate enough to have even > the slightest interest in what you or any of your incompetent > "friends" think of my work, I will have given up photography for ever. > An event long past. -- Peter
From: J. Clarke on 21 Apr 2010 10:51 On 4/21/2010 8:31 AM, whisky-dave wrote: > "Nervous Nick"<nervous.nick(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:103af738-4eb1-4432-8dc1-8bb9344746fd(a)b33g2000yqc.googlegroups.com... > On Apr 20, 1:03 pm, George Kerby<ghost_top...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> On 4/20/10 12:43 PM, in article >> WImdnfpeYZ1CelDWnZ2dnUVZ_jidn...(a)giganews.com, "Frank ess" >> >> >> >> <fr...(a)fshe2fs.com> wrote: >> >>> Tzortzakakis Dimitris wrote: >>>> ? "Bruce"<docnews2...(a)gmail.com> ?????? ??? ?????? >>>> news:o9krs5p6muj0b1fk6c427j440utu6p5aie(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:38:14 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" >>>>> <dha...(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: >> >>>>>> Now, there's a payday ... >> >>>>>> http://www.edmontonjournal.com/entertainment/Photo+worth+million+word... >>>>>> 503/story.html >> >>>>> So many words, yet no sign of the image that is being discussed. >>>>> :-( >>>> Probably, they will put it in a gallery where you'll have to pay an >>>> entrance fee to see it, or it will end in a private collection... >> >>> http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/lot_details.aspx?intObjectID=5315268 >> >> A million bucks for a snapshot?!? >> >> I'm not 'buying' it... > > }Exactly my sentiment. > > Well I'd buy it if I knew I could sell it at a profit, but I don't know > anyone daft enough. > > > }The image contains zero compelling attributes and quite a few annoying > }ones. > > }It's not even a very good snapshot. > > }I had to check the date on that to make sure it wasn't 1 April. > > }Sheesh. > > I know what you mean, I know someone doing a MSc in photo illustrations > I bet they can give me an academic reason why it's worth so much. It's "art"--the brilliance of the artist seems to be in printing 4x5 (feet) on transparency film and mounting it on a light box. I should shoot one of my pinky toe, make up some pretentious title for it and do the same and put it up on ebay with a starting bid of 100K and see what I get.
From: Gary Edstrom on 21 Apr 2010 12:00
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:38:14 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: >Now, there's a payday ... > >http://www.edmontonjournal.com/entertainment/Photo+worth+million+words/2927503/story.html "The emperor isn't wearing any clothes!" |