>>4101265>> You have an antiquated view of art that automatically excludes naive art in favor of high artWhat the fuck are you blabbering about? When did I mention anything about high art?? You’re literally just inserting ideas and monologue in your head at this point & arguing w/ yourself. Meds now schizo.
>> it may be bad art but it's art neverthelessBasically you’re saying so long as there’s a “creative process” everything can be considered art (which is BS and even more antiquated/laughable). But however… the creative process of Winogrand isn’t art, even though many people around the world regard him & celebrates his work & he is very esteemed. Has works in MoMa
Let me guess, you just began your professional photographic career less than a decade ago and think you know more about art and anyone else & you prove this by sharing 2 no name, generic fashion photogs whose work aren’t in MoMa. Really goes to show how low your knowledge of art is
