seriously??

Another example of celebrity "art". Dominic Monaghan (known best as Charlie from LOST and a hobbit from Lord of the Rings) just opened a photo exhibit at the Hamilton Selway Fine Art dealers in Hollywood. I went through the gallery site with a basic level of optimism, hoping that my initial scepticism would be proved wrong. I admire that 20% of proceeds goes to charity, but where is the other 80% going? To the "artist"? Is he not making enough from rights and syndications from sales from his very popular show/movie platforms?

Take a look, but it's all redundant and absolutely forgettable.

Yes I'm ranting - probably incoherently as well - but there are so many talented young artists out there who produce MUCH better work and could benefit from gallery exposure. I am also really upset at the gallery itself for this cheap promotional stunt of using celebrities to put its name on the map.

I don't like to talk poorly about other artists because it's really not up to me to decide what is good art or bad for anyone else. But there are standards that have been established, and I can appreciate technically well-executed art despite my personal tastes. As a formally educated and working professional photographer, I don't see any of the techniques that are taught in basic photography courses. What I see is the result of someone's discovery of Photoshop 7 tricks.

What do you think?