HOME | DD
LEQUARK β
On site or take away? 3
by-nc-nd
[NSFW]
Published: 2012-07-02 14:25:04 +0000 UTC; Views: 14622; Favourites: 220; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Market in Canton
bad land for cats.... and dogs....
Mamiya RB67 TMY Kodak 800 asa
CopyrightDepot.com00046402
Related content
Comments: 591
wow that is graphic or Delicious depending on what perspective you see it from and or eating from lol
π: 0 β©: 0
This should be viewed as a photograph, regardless of subject matter, and I'm sorry but I don't find anything over-the-top artistic about this photo. On the other hand, this photo will invoke anger, revulsion and distaste in many so I assume the DD is based on shock value rather than artistic endeavor, which i feel kinda defeats the purpose of DDs based on talent. The only artistic thing I find about this piece is that the artist chose black and white, which I DO believe was a very good choice in that it gives it a surreal feel.
π: 0 β©: 4
I hope you feel the same way about all the horrible looking porn shots that seem to make DD.
π: 0 β©: 1
If it is a straight, blatant porn shot, no composition, no talent, similar to meat on a table (no pun intended), then yes, I feel exactly the same way! There are other MUCH MORE appropriate sites for such things. I am not against nudity when it is tasteful, has composition, obvious thought and talent and obvious posing, propping, coloring, etc. to make a respectful statement of the beauty of the human form.
π: 0 β©: 1
I agree, but I swear I seen just girls in leather sitting on a chair in a very staged position get DD...
I mean really now.
π: 0 β©: 2
I fear these are cases where the "artwork" receives the attention for the subject matter alone and not the entire piece as a work of "art". It depends on the piece, and each piece is unique and must be judged on its own merits. I do not envy the "judges" that post the DDs because you are never, ever, going to please everyone.
π: 0 β©: 0
There is no accounting for taste. I suspect the "judge(s)" were male (wink).
π: 0 β©: 1
I know right?
π: 0 β©: 0
I loved every comment you posted here.
π: 0 β©: 1
It's listed in photojournalism, this is showing us the way of life of people different from yourself. I think you should be more appreciative for the chance to open your mind to other cultures that live on the same planet as you.
π: 0 β©: 1
The key word is Deviant "ART". Each DD I look at I look at as a piece of ART. Composition, colors, angle, vantage point, etc. I said this should be viewed as a photograph regardless of subject matter, and that I did believe the artist did make a good artistic choice in using black and white. Other than that, I do not find the composition, vantage point, angle, or anything that shows over the top TALENT. If you look at this artist's gallery you will see MANY MANY photographs that I think are VERY OVER THE TOP in talent, composition, color, detail that deserve DDs more than this particular composition. I believe this piece will not get attention due to it's artistic-base, but due to its subject matter only.
π: 0 β©: 3
The other key word is "Deviant":
deΒ·viΒ·ant (dv-nt)
adj.
Differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of a society.
n.
One that differs from a norm, especially a person whose behavior and attitudes differ from accepted social standards.
[link]
Isn't it was a fine adjective for this photojournalist work?
About the artistical value, it is there, look at the thoughts and feelings of the people, your own feelings too. Art only is able to move people like this with one single photograph.
π: 0 β©: 1
I've seen photos of a decapitated human corpse, with his head nearby and a hardened soldier had put a cigarette in his mouth; I've seen crime scene photos of a child's brains splattered and dripping down the wall, in living (sorry, unliving) color. And here is a dog, something considered a pet in some places, hung on a hook with its guts hanging out. It is just meat, after all, just like humans. I already repeatedly indicated I believed the artist had every right in the world to post this photo, and I also indicated I thought the use of black and white did give it an artistic aspect, a surrealism (and I indicated that the artist is talented and has some very nice works). I didn't say it didn't belong in DA, I simply said I felt that a DD seemed a bit overboard using measurements of creation, imagination, time, talent and work required to create the piece.
π: 0 β©: 1
you have your right to opinion of course. One thought it was worth a DD and proposed it, a second accepted it. This is the way it works. But you seem to have no idea the work it took to get this image taken. This is not a tourist's shot during a tourist trip. This is material for reportage that is used here. 100% manual medium format camera with a real film in it, that weights about 8kg. Just the weight is an effort common photographers would'nt give to get the shots the photographer here worked on. Without talking about shooting something that it hard to watch at, there in the midle of the street in a foreign place, in astrange culture...
π: 0 β©: 1
Exactly my point. I DO understand the WORK. I have photo journalist friends (some who have done radical photos of the horrors of war). I also know crime-scene photographers. And I believe it 100% appropriate for journalism sites, news sites, magazines, media, television, and even on DA and in the own artist's gallery. I also expressed my admiration for many of the artist's works. But I expect more from the DDs page, since it is so public and represents DA as an artistic community as a whole. I have seen other works as well that I did not feel represented DA as a whole. I applaud all the groups, who have contests and show artwork specifically related to what their viewers wish to see (regardless of what it is), and recognize these talented people. Perhaps I am wrong, but I thought the DDs were representations of DA as an artistic community as a whole and of the site. I don't believe my comments were as harsh as some, and I was respectful of the artist in every comment. It almost appears to me that my rather mild comments are causing almost as large a stir as the piece itself, which I find rather disappointing.
π: 0 β©: 1
Please have a look on this: FAQ #61: What is a Daily Deviation?
and you will see the DD aren't supposed to be representative of the "community", but seems just "impressive or otherwise interesting enough to deserve being brought to the attention of the community-at-large" so I guess your critique about how this photo should not be a daily deviation is just missing the point
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh yes, you did mention one person suggested and one approved. So the community-at-large needed this brought to their attention. Okay. That was their opinion. My opinion was this was a piece that should be on DA, and should be in the artist's wonderful gallery, but I didn't think it rose to the level of a DD. Just one person's opinion, which doesn't matter anyway, because it IS a DD and my opinion is a moot point anyway. No offense was ever intended. I believed comments (personal opinions) were allowed as long as a DA member remained respectful. I obviously offended you. My apologies.
π: 0 β©: 1
No worries, I'm not offended. I take this just as a discussion between civilized people
π: 0 β©: 1
FAQ #873: What do I do when I disapprove of a Daily Deviation feature?
π: 0 β©: 0
That means in your opinion, all photojournalism is not art when that is simply not the case. Everyone's definition of art is different, I think one of those definitions of art is to provoke thought and feeling. This does just that.
π: 0 β©: 2
I agree wholeheartedly, people are getting up in arms about this photo, but that's the point! You're SUPPOSED to feel something when you look at it.
π: 0 β©: 2
Yes as an entire piece I completely agree. But ANYONE could have taken this exact same photo simply by BEING there at that spot at that time (or probably any time, since this is culturally acceptable). I do applaud the artist for using black and white; which DOES create a more surreal image.
π: 0 β©: 1
Most photos of day-to-day lives could be taken by anyone. As such, the fact that this photo was taken, and was shared with people is what makes the difference I feel. After-all, the point of photo journalism is to illustrate something, and immediately make you feel a response. Using that logic, this photo is a good representation of the category it's in. I just wish so many people didn't whine at every artistic nude, or controversial photograph that gets a DD, that they see. >-< There's a decent portion of lower quality drawn artwork that can be found in the old DD sections, but everyone seemed to salivate over those when they were featured. Yet when someone posts a photograph that isn't 100% up to their standards of clothing and normalcy, a lot of people start saying how it isn't even considered art.
π: 0 β©: 0
Absolutely not! Plenty of photojournalism is artistic. Yes art provokes thought, feelings, emotions. My opinion is simply that the piece should invoke these things not just by its subject matter, but by its composition, thought, and talent that it took to create the piece.
π: 0 β©: 1
I see composition and I see thought that went into this when creating the piece.
π: 0 β©: 1
Sighhhhh. People I am not BASHING the artist! I think this artist's gallery is amazing (take a look!!!!). I think this piece should be in this artist's gallery. I think the artist has a right to post it. I simply didn't feel it rose to the level of a DD, and of course every one of us likes different types of art. I see other comments here much worse than mine! And I in fact encourage everyone to look at this artist's gallery - it is amazing, and it contains an amazing amount of works!
π: 0 β©: 1
There is no standard level of a "DD" so I don't know what you're talking about. There's no rules that say "A DD needs to have this many hours of work put into it and it needs to be this level of awesome.." Nothing like that. I can take a picture of a stick and it can be a DD
π: 0 β©: 1
Well take one - that will make 6 items in your gallery WOOOO HOOOO ^5
π: 0 β©: 1
And for gawd-sakes - I actually have been complimenting the artist!
π: 0 β©: 0
P.S. It does also make one wonder how many of the mutilation photos submitted with the (this is makeup) are actually lies...
π: 0 β©: 1
hm. youΒ΄re not really making any point with your defence arguing. anyways. this is not mutilation. itΒ΄s simply food. the same as the dead chicken you buy in the supermarket, all wrapped up nicely in foil.
i know itΒ΄s pointless to start an argument with you cause you have your opinion and i have mine and i think both our minds are set. but i couldnΒ΄t resist on replying and putting my view next to yours.
π: 0 β©: 1
Geesh - my comments were nice compared to most! Nuff of this 
π: 0 β©: 1
;D i know. iΒ΄m just wondering some times how different people can be. and in your case it wasnΒ΄t that great bewilderment but rather just a light shake of the head. but as i said, no point in arguing over personal opinions if theyΒ΄re not utterly mad
π: 0 β©: 0
Well, the presentation could be better, but I bet it tastes decent
π: 0 β©: 0
I've always owned dogs, and now own guinea pigs, both of which are eaten every day. This photo doesn't bother me in the slightest, and I actually find it quite interesting
π: 0 β©: 2
Both of your guinea pigs are eaten every day? 
π: 0 β©: 2
Guinea pigs are actually really tasty!
π: 0 β©: 1
Pretty fiddly though I imagine.
π: 0 β©: 1
Of course, but there's no point in processing the juveniles. Take one adult, add one slice of bread, some vegetables and you have nice content for your lunch-box.
π: 0 β©: 0
Not everyday, I prefer not to have repetitive meals ;D
π: 0 β©: 1
Phew! Well at least they get some respite.
π: 0 β©: 0
I never realized the redcoats were still devouring household pets. Oh my!
π: 0 β©: 0
I wonder how it will taste... 
π: 0 β©: 0
I would try it I mean why not I love animals but when you have to eat you have to eat
π: 0 β©: 0
this kinda shocked me at first, but u have to agree w/ some of the people commenting. it does deserve DD because even though to some people it can be disturbing, to others it is a great way to show how different people/cultures live. also I do agree that you shouldn't always have pretty things as DD. sometimes 'ugly' is beautiful too.
π: 0 β©: 0
Congrats on your DD and thank you for sharing these images. It's wonderful to get a true and visceral exposure to different cultures (especially in the states where we tend to forget that there are Other ways of doing things). This is a wonderful shot and you did a great job of capturing the facts of what was going on without unduly focusing on any single part. I think the choice to use B/W was very good, as it downplays what might otherwise be a very 'colorful' scene. It presents a bit of a barrier between the viewer and what has occurred (a bit of a safety net, if you will).
In truth, I think that this could even be compared to Dutch still-life paintings (clearly transplanted into a different culture with different ideals). Both depict the transitory nature of life and that things do wilt and die. Sometimes the end is more violent that others.
Again, congrats on the DD and given the nature of the work... congrats on the slew of comments (both 'good' and 'bad'). It is well deserved.
π: 0 β©: 0
<= Prev | | Next =>