He set a record for naked photography with a photo of 18,000 people in the buff in Mexico City last year.
I think they meant last month... He's been in the news a lot lately.
I want to take part in a Spencer Tunick shoot in Belgium:
Naked and covered in chocolate! What could be better than that!
What's with the nudididity thing? Wouldn't the photo (especially at that distance) have the same impact if the cyclists were all wearing red spandex cycling suits?
Realize that this wasn't the photographer's picture, it was from the AP. Who know what angle or distance Tunick actually got the shot from.
Also note that this wasn't the picture of the cyclists. You can see that one in the News in Pictures module on the front page if you want. The idea of these pictures is the nudity. Without it, you lose the entire concept of what he's going for in his collection.
Thanks.
So, what is he going for in his collection? The Guiness world record for convincing large numbers of people to pose nude?
I think you're looking at this as someone who sees nudity in the wrong way. The photos become artistic because they bring up issues that can be discussed and debated.
One person nude has been done time and again. At that point, it becomes about form and beauty and whatnot. Thousands of nudes 1) brings up the debate of "naked or nude" and 2) raises the question of are they "nude" at all if thousands upon thousands of people are nude.
To me, nudity (and certainly being "naked") is usually based on the privacy and intimacy of the matter. If thousands of participants are naked, it throws the privacy and intimacy factor out the window, and you're forced to focus on other aspects of the gathering. "From a distance" they look like a pattern of shapes, sizes, colors and you lose the ability to distinguish one from the other due to being part of a whole.
If you have 30 naked people -- and one guy wearing all his clothes: My bet is that the guy wearing all the clothes is going to be the most talked about person in the photo.
These photos are art because they can be evaluated in this way and -- more importantly -- because the photographer set up the situation specifically to create said evaluation.
With that in mind, a bystanders photo of the same scene (in my view) ceases to be art (even if it's well composed) because he/she had no intention in taking the photo -- other than to capture of strange moment.
Over there on the left, under a tree, a great big pile of clothes.
Ha! I wondered the same thing! On the video, linked below by tjackson, you can see them disrobing. What fun!
Sounds like it's worth a look. Goede reis! for Thursday by the way.
lol at the guy looking out the window is picture 3/3
All I can think of is the video for Queen's Bicycle Race
Here it is on tape http://www.tvn24.pl/-1,1508942.1,wiadomosc.html
Most excellent!
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |