>>3221816Wow, you're fucking stupid, and here's why.
>>3221811>you can't say he's *objectively* shit because whether or not you like Justin Bieber's music is a (subjective) preference>no art is better than other artYou contradict yourself; unless you're confirming this shit is only subjectively good and purely to those as simpleminded and stupid as justin bieber fans.
Unfortunately, people liking something doesn't make it objectively not shit.
>blue is objectively a better or worse color than yellowIf yellow has instruments played by skillful musicians, a more complex and meaningful structure, profound lyrics, etc, and blue is a loop of a simple verse and a chorus that appeal to teenage girls, then obviously I agree there is no objectivity to saying yellow is better at all.
>>3221813>You think these are bad because>implying I'm as simpleminded as youWrong. I don't give a shit about which flash was used, yet it still looks like shit.
>You also think it’s bad because the colors are unnaturalAgain, it has nothing to do with unnatural colors, you fucking simpleminded idiot. Sure, these unnatural colors look autistic and edgy, but they only add to the pile of shit that these photos are overall.
>they're collectively a pictureFinally, the only defense to your taste that is coherent. You're admitting the photos are shit on their own but somehow good and interesting all together. Now that is subjective, and that's fine to think, if you think this is somehow meaningful or interesting.
Unfortunately, our mentally ill friend here recycles through the same subjects, locations, landscape in every thread losing whatever meaningful atmosphere it once had, apart from the artificial one forced by the shit look of choice.
