Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Photography
Related: About this forum
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
7 replies, 834 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (13)
ReplyReply to this post
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nothing in this famous "painting" is what it seems. (Original Post)
catbyte
Jan 2023
OP
AndyS
(14,559 posts)1. All well and good BUT
is it a 'real photograph'?
ShazzieB
(16,973 posts)3. Yes, it started out as a "real" photograph.
The video makes that quite clear.
AndyS
(14,559 posts)4. That was a bit of tongue in cheek commentary 😁
over some recent controversy.
Grumpy Old Guy
(3,261 posts)5. I got the joke.
CaliforniaPeggy
(150,270 posts)2. Very cool video! Thank you, my dear catbyte, for sharing it. n/t
Grumpy Old Guy
(3,261 posts)6. It's a shame that he only felt the need to give the guy five bucks!
Granted, five bucks in those days was actually worth something, but the photographer's family is still making money off the image. Perhaps the model's life might have been different if he was able to share more of the proceeds.
catbyte
(34,703 posts)7. Yeah, I thought that was kinda sleazy of the photographer, too.