Bill Borne
Veteran Member
Thanks You always have interesting shots
--
"Life's Too Short to Worry about the BS!"
So I Pick my Battles
Click for Wild Man's Photos
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Thanks You always have interesting shots



To me it is Graffiti
fish...
.. yes, the trees are living, but can you recognize the fish, which is definitely not living. You can argue, that the fish will modify by growing with the trees, therefore the exhibit is not strikly "non-living", or it is a kind of "mobile art" with a fixed center point. (ergo, "non-living")
Ulrich
And Graffiti is non moving! Ok, then the post is within the rules of the challenge.To me it is Graffiti
fish...
.. yes, the trees are living, but can you recognize the fish, which is definitely not living. You can argue, that the fish will modify by growing with the trees, therefore the exhibit is not strikly "non-living", or it is a kind of "mobile art" with a fixed center point. (ergo, "non-living")
Ulrich
I would like to add a further comment. I think, it is more than Graffiti. You only can see the fish, when you stand in the correct angle in front of the trees. Otherwise, you only see random lines. The "Graffiti?" was done by an artist (in 2008), who did also other kind of exhibit in the wood. Here is the notice:And Graffiti is non moving! Ok, then the post is within the rules of the challenge.To me it is Graffiti
fish...
.. yes, the trees are living, but can you recognize the fish, which is definitely not living. You can argue, that the fish will modify by growing with the trees, therefore the exhibit is not strikly "non-living", or it is a kind of "mobile art" with a fixed center point. (ergo, "non-living")
Ulrich
Ulrich


Yes of course it isAnd Graffiti is non moving! Ok, then the post is within the rules of the challenge.To me it is Graffiti
fish...
.. yes, the trees are living, but can you recognize the fish, which is definitely not living. You can argue, that the fish will modify by growing with the trees, therefore the exhibit is not strikly "non-living", or it is a kind of "mobile art" with a fixed center point. (ergo, "non-living")
Ulrich
Ulrich
Well if it is private property or sanctioned by some form of government then I would say it's art. But if done just in a natural setting like a park....In the Us doing that in a national park is a crime. Anyhow that was just my opinion.I would like to add a further comment. I think, it is more than Graffiti. You only can see the fish, when you stand in the correct angle in front of the trees. Otherwise, you only see random lines. The "Graffiti?" was done by an artist (in 2008), who did also other kind of exhibit in the wood. Here is the notice:And Graffiti is non moving! Ok, then the post is within the rules of the challenge.To me it is Graffiti
fish...
.. yes, the trees are living, but can you recognize the fish, which is definitely not living. You can argue, that the fish will modify by growing with the trees, therefore the exhibit is not strikly "non-living", or it is a kind of "mobile art" with a fixed center point. (ergo, "non-living")
Ulrich
Ulrich
Now I do think the 2nd photo is pretty cool.
You will have to explain it to be an entry?
I'm not sure these fir the theme but for exhibits I'm not gonna get too picky.