*MandyMorbid

    Share
    avatar
    .Gunhilde.
    Head Moderator

    Female Taurus Posts : 202
    Join date : 2010-12-04

    *MandyMorbid

    Post by .Gunhilde. on Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:40 pm

    These discussions took place on the profile and "art" of *MandyMorbid. I would post pictures from her gallery, but they are NSFW. The following comments are abbreviated (comments without conflict not shown). Thread links can be found at the beginning of each section, where you can read the whole thing.


    1. Comment on Deviation "Photo 2010"
    Warning: Link is NSFW

    (Comment Thread)


    ~Gunnhilde 14 hours ago


    Ugh. There isn't even a drop of art in this. DeviantART isn't the place to store your nudes. It's a art site. Invest in a proper camera, edit your photos a little, at least make a bloody effort.

    ~rammystic 9 hours ago


    link
    wtf? is that art? no, that's crap, like your other works. and you judging a beatiful pussy. idiot.

    `aeterne 2 hours ago


    porn is not art, dear. there are special websites if you're looking for more photos like this. but here - this is not the right place. face it. and by the way, insulting people can cause you a permanent ban of your account. ; )

    ~Gunnhilde 41 minutes ago


    Rolling Eyes This is your attempt at trolling? Pretty weak.

    Having a 'nice pussy' doesn't make it art. It's just porn. And I said nothing about myself. My art and my work is unrelated to the discussion, whether you think it sucks or not (and it doesn't). So you're both wrong and invalid. Oh, yes, and having nothing uploaded makes you just as bad as you think I supposedly am. Hypocrite.


    Now for the actual shame...

    2. Comments on *MandyMorbid's Page
    Warning: Images are NSFW

    (Comment Thread)

    *DaggeH 11 hours ago


    Seriously, there are two images in here. Not one of them anywhere near well captured or visually pleasing to the eye. You have a heck of a body, I'll give you that (and that would be the only "pleasing" part). But two pictures (with what seems to be taken with a web-camera) and you have more pageviews than I have gotten in 4 years with 49 deviations. There are just a bunch of horny guys in here looking at it, you know that is true... But hey, if that's the audience and attention you are looking to attract, I guess you have done well. If you're just looking for fucking this site over (which you have succeded with), I guess you have done well. But you, as well as I, know that these images doesn't really belong here on deviantART. Don't fool yourself to think otherwise.

    ~Gunnhilde 11 hours ago


    I agree with this. Well said.

    ~gwendrael 11 hours ago


    This young lady has had many deviations posted on her page, but for some reason removed them all and posted 2 new ones... nothing to be jealous of. As to what is Art or not, or who should be on DA or not, I am quite happy it is not yours to choose. You sound so 19th century... Maybe you should learn a bit about contemporary photography, or maybe you should ask the lady what her aim is, before posting childish undocumented judgments. Good day.

    ~Danosix 9 hours ago


    Are you trolling? No one can surely be this naive and think this user is keeping with modern photography techniques.

    ~gwendrael 6 hours ago


    I am not taking technique, I am taking art, which indeed are in no way equivalent concepts. To achieve artistic value technique is not compulsory. Technique is available to anyone, conveying valuable concepts is neither bound to technique nor, sometimes, to will. If you take a closer look to these 2 pictures you might find semantic interests which might not even have appeared to the young lady there,or maybe did...

    *DaggeH 9 hours ago


    What we see is what we are complaining about, which is two images with no taste. The 19th century ended eleven years ago, and it's not like the world was less tolerable against crap back then.

    "Contemporary photography"? I guess everyone is an artist then, even the 15 year old girls taking pictures of their cleavage with their cell phones in the bathroom mirror. Because you know what? They are contemporary photographers, I dare you to say otherwise.

    Do you also consider monkeys and 2-year olds who splashes paint on a blank canvas to be artists? Critiques praise them, simply because they do not know who made them, and therefore they think that there is motivation and an idea behind what is visible on the canvas.

    ~gwendrael 6 hours ago


    Btw, 19th century ended 111 years ago, that is one century plus eleven years, Starting with that ^^.
    I am not taking of taste, if you had any art education you wouldn't even use the word "taste". You cannot imagine how many times I have heard your kind of uneducated speech against contemporary art, which I will not bother fight back.

    Read and learn, you will measure the arrogance and ignorance of what yu write.
    And Yes, maybe there is more art, in terms of functional concept in a 15 years old girl shooting her cleavage than in most heavily worked works : reality, spontaneity, sexuality are axis on which to analyse these pictures, and they work really fine.

    Have you ever heard of Richardson, Mapplethorn or Kern ?

    *DaggeH 2 hours ago


    Well then you're just all wrong out, since anything I said wasn't anywhere near what they would have said one hundred years ago.

    Uneducated? You really think you need to have an education to have an opinion? You know, that education doesn't make you a "higher being", you and your opinion are part of the same compost heap as everyone and everything else.
    Art isn't something you learn from an education. An educated artist may legally be able to call himself an artist, and I may not. However, this says nothing about who really is the artist.

    "And Yes, maybe there is more art, in terms of functional concept in a 15 years old girl shooting her cleavage than in most heavily worked works : reality, spontaneity, sexuality are axis on which to analyse these pictures, and they work really fine."

    Are you really comparing talent and hard work with "reality, spontaneity and sexuality" to what art is? Could it be more pretentious to think like that? I'm guessing your education didn't really help you out more than it destroyed your perspective.

    ~gwendrael 32 minutes ago


    This interesting discussion could go on forever, and will not : hard work isn't talent and talent is scarce, and neither automaticaly lead to Art. You talk about a perspective which evidently you lack of, it seems I am talking to a bad first year student, which is not right, because he would still be far more open minded than you are.

    To have a VALUABLE opinion you obviously need a firm cultural background, an education, how more evident can this be? Just to know what you are talking about !
    This education would also make clear to you that the words you use are fachist as is the point of vue you defend. Read ANY art history book, ANY modern photography book and they will tell you what I am saying. But reading is culture, and you don't need culture , do you ?
    Or are we all wrong, are you a messiah detaining the ultimate truth on Art ?

    You think you know for sure what Art is or isn't, that is plain philosophical failure.

    No one knows.

    You still may say you like or dislike something, that is subjectivity ; and what is wrong in your expression is the obvious confusion between subjective matters and objective matters.
    Go back to basics. Learn how art as evolved in the last two centuries, learn why people that got judgmental about art or humanity in terms of a "compost heap" were nazis, communists or, more recently, islamic totalitarians.

    Is that what you belong to? I don't need to know, don't bother answering.

    Have a nice day.

    ~Gunnhilde 58 seconds ago


    I know quite a bit about contemporary photography. My sister is a professional photographer, with professional cameras and boxes full of equipment. This isn't photography at all, no matter how you look at it. It's just trash. And the fact that she had photos up before but removed them means nothing, simply because none of the people currently arguing (except for you, obviously) have seen them, and therefor they mean nothing in the current discussion.

    Let's not lie and say this girl is something to be jealous of, eh? Her only redeeming merit is that there are a bunch of perverts who like to look at her vag, which really isn't a redeeming merit at all.

    Art is partly opinion, yes, but you are also wrong when you say technique is not compulsory. Take a look at the artistic nudes on DeviantART, the ones that aren't taken with webcam, are properly set up and lit, and have effort spent in post processing. These, I can guarantee, will be more pleasing to the eye than what you see here. You say that effort doesn't automatically equal art, but it goes a long way. I highly prefer even the most simple of photographs, because the photography didn't just spread their legs and push a button, and it shows.

    Truthfully, with all your spouting at education, you make yourself sound like a elitist, and not a good one at that. One does not need a "education" to have a opinion. One does not need a formal education to know what they are talking about, either. That is one of the many things internet and books are useful for. Let's see, you claim that our point of view is fachist, that our point of view is bigoted. What about yours? None of us are some messiah, but each and every person is also a part of the whole. That includes you. And yes, we can like or dislike something. That is our right. And that is yours, as well. But what does opinion and art have to do with being a communist, or a nazi? Better yet, where are the artists in both communist countries and nazi-era Germany in your arguement? Are you saying people are incapable of creating art because of their beliefs and actions, that are completely unrelated? That is a personal attack, not a point.

    If you're going to attempt to make a point, get off your pedestal, first. Maybe then someone will actually care about what you say. You're right, this discussion could go on forever, but it won't. I think everyone here has heard enough of your hypocritical point of view. Enough said.

    [size=18]~Gwendrael


    _________________

    Head moderator and Administrator.
    avatar
    _Hiatus_
    Head Moderator

    Male Gemini Posts : 113
    Join date : 2010-12-04

    Re: *MandyMorbid

    Post by _Hiatus_ on Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:00 pm

    Wow. How many times did he contradict himself? And who the hell does he think he is? Some god?

    People like this piss me off. Evil or Very Mad


    _________________

    I overdosed on Vitamins a long time ago.
    I'm the head moderator here. Hi.

      Current date/time is Tue Jul 25, 2017 7:30 pm