invisible art [large detail]
This is a true story (only the names have been withheld, for considerations of privacy and copyright):
A young artist is chosen to be in a group show at a respectable small non-profit space.What does the blogger do in this case, and in the larger scheme of things, what does this scenario say about our cultural institutions' photography restrictions generally?
An appreciative and enthusiastic art blogger captures an image of the artist's work installed in that space and publishes it on his site.
On a return visit to the space months later the blogger is told by people in charge that photographs are not allowed at any time.
The blogger ceases to photograph any artists' work in that space.
Two years after the image of the young artist's work appeared on the blogger's site a major museum in another city writes to him asking if it could have permission to use it in publicity materials being prepared prior to a solo show it has scheduled of the artist's work, since there is no other photograph of the piece available.
The blogger suspects that the piece itself may no longer physically exist, thus explaining the importance of his photograph.
[invisible image from alpinebutterfly]