Here a few pic of bugs & beetles, taken in Greece last month. Any thoughts on what an ant could want a rose thorn for?

The soft inner must be high in sugars? Nice macro shots.

Or, he’s playing Darth Vader in the Anthill Theatre companies production of “The Deathstar Canteen”.
I DON’T NEED A TRAY.

A quick question for those more legal minded than I.

I work in retail and are aware that my company sends mystery shoppers in. Tonight I am greeted by an email where it appears we have had a new form of mystery shopper come onto site and mark the staff on differant criteria. I have no problem with that. What does worry me is that the mystery shopper has taken photographs of my staff working (or not in this case)

Whilst not trying to cover any wrong doings by my staff is it right that staff can be photographed unaware ? Personally whilst agreeing with cctv this is a whole differant kettle of fish.

Any thoughts ?

If members of the public are in the shots, that’s not allowed. On privacy rights and also, there is some by-law about photographing people in shops.

I think your staff should have been made aware that the mystery shopper was changing tactics. I am assuming they were all told that the Mystery shopper was always able to come in, randomly etc.

I’d be pretty happy if someone thought that my ugly puss was worth a photo or two. Doubt that I’d get 2.7 mill. though !

John Green

Wrong thread. And, not art.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes.
If you are a fan of the original, and that is possibly the only audience it will get, the film gives a semi-plausible reason of how the Apes became superior.
But, many plot holes, underlying story is predictable and garbage.

4/10.

Ah well.
An aeroplane forum will, by the very best laws of 80/20 stereotyping, contain more of it’s fair share of Engineers/geeks/spotters/pilots. “Right siders”, practical minded – where black is black and white is white and the grey areas are avoided because there is no definition or classification. “Left siders”, on an art forum for example would give a totally different view so the sweeping statement that “It’s all rubbish” is inward looking.
So, the thread has gone as expected for this particular population, it’s me n Arthur versus the your World.
Shaking head and moving on is, IMO, odd behavior because presumably you went into the gallery in the first place?
If I see something I do not understand put in front of me as “art” then I try and see what the message is, I cannot dislike art because it cannot hurt me. I can totally disaprove (The Myra Hindly picture made of childs handprints) but, when one sees the difficulty of producing the image one has to admire the quality.
The matchstick works of LS Lowry could be bought for pin-money in the 70’s, but once he died (76?) the prices went beyong mortgages, and people that would never have considerd owning one were now showing off they had one.
To assume artists need some level of formal training is wrong on all levels IMO. An art Historian would do, an art critic may need some, but an artist can come from anywhere, and that’s what keeps it fresh.

This particualr photograph, I could stare at for a while and enjoy it. A masterpiece of simplicity.
I studied / stared at “Mersey Mud” for an hour at the L/pool Tate. 100 feet long, 15 feet high, totally Brown, totally made of Mersey mud. Masterpiece? Well, there wasn’t a blemish in it, not a single shade of brown that was off, not a patch that had dried faster than another etc. Not only was it clever, but NOBODY ELSE THOUGHT OF IT.

The new version of Conan the Barbarian.
Avoid. 2/10.
Unless you are a female and want to look at the 6-packed-hunk playing the lead role.

When somebody is kicked in the head, a gallon of blood does not spray out all over the wall. SFX to make you cringe or cry.

The fact that you are talking about it means the artist has indeed got a message across!
You will remember that photo for many years to come now!
As for “traditional” art, it’s all to do with taste…I think some of the great masters are actually rubbish. The Temeraire versus The Haywain, IMO Turner used “Atmosphere” to avoid doing detailed work. OK, he got the Clouds to look good.

Art?
Well, my 2 year old made a picture for me, out of twigs / leaves and acorns etc. from the garden. She made the pattern, she stuck the stuff down with white glue. She thought it would be nice for me as I work away. It’s worth SIGNIFICANTLY more than 4.5m to me…..and that is the whole point about the “Value” of art.

There’s varying tastes and then there are the things that really do take the **** such as this, any photo mag shows how to photoshop out stuff you don’t want, it’s really not hard.

It all went down hill after Duchamp displayed his urinal, that sadly was the point at which the green flag was given to fleece the art connoisseurs with ready mades.

Everything that can be done in Photoshop can and was done in the Wet printing process of pictures. Now, more people have access to it, that’s all.

The picture in question is the opposite of what we all would look for in a picture. It is a boring flat picture with nothing happening in it. And THAT is why it is so unique, simplicity. I’m not saying it’s worth all that money (That could be small change to the buyer anyway) but the picture is excellent.