99 Cent Store Gursky RE-DO.

    Newer Older

    Here I have duplicated Gursky's seminal "99 Cent " without photo-retouching. The composition is used to question Gursky and his methods -- what is Gursky trying to tell us? Why? And ... why? This composition adds more hanging dangly things to create a balance between the horizontal and vertical elements, an integral part of the work missing from Gursky's composition. Gursky's work challenges us to consider the perspective of the viewer, and the mis-en-scene of the duality of the encompassing sangfroid hourly.

    Original piece: here or google images.

    &mark, Kathryn Yu, Locator, and 10 other people added this photo to their favorites.

    1. soosan 118 months ago | reply

      Gursky's shit is super high-res.

    2. cardhouse 118 months ago | reply

      This photo is as well, you just have to look closer. Closer ... closer ... almost there ...

    3. jakedobkin 118 months ago | reply

      i think the prob is that you are too close- you need to move back- get the whole scene in. he grabs the symmetry of the place better.

    4. cardhouse 118 months ago | reply

      I literally rushed in, took a shot, ran out 'cause I had a friend waiting in the car. I didn't know that this variety of 99 cent store is/was where I was living and now where I live and this store turned out to be a smaller version of their standard store, I believe. I am filled with excuses.

      I may, in the future, give it another shot if it's completely convenient and not out of the way. Art demands these types of sacrifices.

    5. LeaningLeft 116 months ago | reply

      Well, sometimes the medium is the message and that's it :)

    6. dogwelder 87 months ago | reply

      Yes, your work is not similar, and because it is not, it is too similar, and working toward the similar would make it more similar, and attempting to recreate famous images should never be done, for you can learn nothing about photography by recreating an image to see how it was made.

      It's just too sad.

    7. cardhouse 87 months ago | reply

      Gabor: Please gingerly insert your head into a moose's asshole. I call this my Triumphant Gabor Klima Moose Asshole piece. I say "gingerly" because the moose may kick, and then my conceptual art will not be realized -- if so, Klaus, my art/drug dealer, will be very angry indeed.

      Bidding starts at $3000. Do I have any bidders?

    8. dogwelder 87 months ago | reply

      I'd pay a buck to see that!

    9. cardhouse 87 months ago | reply


    10. D.J. De La Vega 62 months ago | reply

      It's an intersting juxtaposition, trying to use low budget methods to try to rival Gursky's ultra expensive extreme high quality shots. I like it a lot, tho I'm not sure what the ulimate message is. Do you like his methods or are you fighting them?

    11. dogwelder 62 months ago | reply

      I can't speak for cardhouse, but I don't think I took mine is an effort to do anything more than see how close I could come to Gursky's with a quick and dirty redo.

    12. cardhouse 62 months ago | reply

      I'm just a chump owns a lump with a bump
      I press the bump, out comes a dump

      Anyway, I was talking to Gursky the other day with finger puppets, and he was all "HA! HA!" And then I stopped and got real serious and in his face and growled "I .. will .. FIGHT .. you." That's when time stopped, the finger puppets looked at each other like "Oh SHIT it is ON"

      Also I don't edit my photos. Also what Dogwelder said, how close is close. Without editing, with a junk lump.

    13. yych2o 44 months ago | reply

      This one's worth at least $4 million if you slap it on some glass and blow it up.

    14. cardhouse 44 months ago | reply

      You mean like an explosion that sends glass shards throughout the gallery, destroying other works? Yesssssssssss

    keyboard shortcuts: previous photo next photo L view in light box F favorite < scroll film strip left > scroll film strip right ? show all shortcuts