>>2994267>What would be a passable use of white border for you?I think that that would depend on the work in question, although I am hard-pressed to think of a specifically *digital/online* context where white borders appeared around photographs without becoming instant kitsch. I'm not suggesting that we simply do away with the conventional gallery presentation that adorns photos with all the trappings of "fine-art" (and hence do away with the white border in its "natural habitat" as it were), since that would be impossible; although I invariably find such images boring, bourgeois and collectible.
In a significant way my problem with the white border has to do with the difference between analog or physical and digital photography, because this is a difference that resolves primarily in the way the images are processed and displayed (rather than how they are initially rendered by the camera via the lens). So if I had to prescribe something I'd say that any use of the white border in contemporary photography must conceive of it first of all as a plastic (rather than conceptual or structural) object. Something much easier said than done.
>Photography as "reticulated, involuted, and absolutely atomizing"That is a description of the predominant conditions of photography's existence in [>current year] and as such refers to a reality that photography-based art should at least take into account.
Also--maybe there is something to OP's image. At least it made me think of pic related.
