How is this girl's work considered photography?

Well they are photographs . . .

If a half sheep http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0djMfef5PMbTC/... pickled in formaldehyde, or a tent http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://wilde... with pieces of things stuck to it can be art, who's to say her photographs aren't art.

I'm afraid they don't float my both either, but there's no accounting for taste (or the lack of it).

I do claim to be very knowledgeable about art, having studied art history under the former director of the Portland Art museum. I say her stuff is very cheesy. Some of her photos are pretty cool but most are just Flickr-chick stuff, shoes and balloons. WTF? So I had to guess her films are her specialty. But those are even worse! People look at fireworks and then a layered smoke cloud makes it look like the couple blew up? I don't get it at all.

She seems to come from the post modernists perspective which landed on America's doorstep with Clark's Tulsa and solidified by the likes of Nan Golden and Lauren Greenfield. This concept of the existential teenage angst was made mainstream by Richard Linklater and Larry Clark, celebrating and exploreing the energy of youth in the manufactured environment by presenting the questions of it's existsnace and "bad faith."

But these are celebrated works made with skill and meaning. I don't see that in her stuff. Perhaps you could argue "she is doing the moving picture, bringing the subtle emotion of the human to bluntly stare the viewer in the face. Her invitation into a life is striking in it's candor." if I had to half-*** a paper that's what I'd put. But I really don't see much more to her work than the spoils of being rich and white.

She is taking photos with a camera, as far as I know thats called photography.

I see what you mean. Unfortunately, people can call whatever art. Even mediocrity is considered art in some circles. Like those people that throw paint at a white canvas and call it art.

It's photography. Just not very good photography. I'd call it ho hum. Nothing special.

She is using a camera to take photos, what do you call it landscaping?

i think she tried to make something good but her camera work isn't that good that's why she failed to produce what she have thought of taking

She uses a camera and captures images.

I.

Don't.

Get it.

BUT - That's not to say it isn't art. Perhaps I'm missing something, perhaps she's not communicating her meaning to me. Maybe there's someone out there who does get it.

It's this kind of work that makes me think I am in the WRONG line of work. I strive to take photographs that are in focus, correctly exposed, well composed, etc, etc, etc. Any drunken fool with a camera can take photos of their panties hanging out the window!

But again, perhaps I missed something...

*shrugs*

Thats not photography.

Thats, and i am being nice here, 5h it. crappy. whats with the lingerie blowing to the left from the right pictures???

whats with hte weird modelling position beside the old guy??? WHAT THE HECK IS SHE DOING.

P.s recheck the conventions and locations and maybe call the place she went to....ask for her name and see if she pops up. cos seriously. if she did go to all these conventions or whatever then they're either for Blind people, OR her website does not reflect her true....skills.....