I must say these photos were hilarious. I must also say that i am not the least bit surprised at the outrageous requests from these celebrities. You hear the stories of the rockstar lifestyle, the nights full of alchohol, drugs, and sex but whos to say what really occurs behind closed doors? I was never the type to wish i was rich and famous but i guess the experience, to know what it is like would be nice. However, nonsmelly cheese? Thats probably the best kind! I just can’t see myself being that ridiculous just because of my status. But then again i can’t judge anyone for their lifestyle. I read an article recently of Arethra Franklin attending a broadway show by herself and just her body guards. It was said that she was being obnoxious taking pictures of the show when she even isn’t allowed to. People would complain but when they found out who it was they totally disregarded it because she was Arethra Frankin. And its completely off topic but it makes me wonder how many celebrities get away with things just because of their status. You would think they were normal like we are but they are far from it. I’ll stick to being my regular boring basic self lol .

Robert Frank’s collection of 83 photographs in book titled “The American’s”, is an interesting look at how he personally viewed his country. In his collection, photographs of poverty, racial division, and banal day to day life of Americans were depicted. I do find his photographs to be artistic because there is meaning behind every single picture. I don’t think Frank took these photographs for us to understand why he took them, i think they were meant for his personal understanding of what was going on around him. He wanted to understand the whos, whats, wheres, whens, and hows. Like stated in the clip of the Exhibition by curator Peter Galassi, Frank wanted to understand his people. A perfect example is the photograph of the White-American baby being held by the African-American woman. Frank wanted to understand how could a mother trust this black woman with her child but completely disregard the same black woman in public. Frank photographed pictures of the everyday lives of Americans which seem rather boring. In the photos these people rarely make eye contact nor smile, mainly because they were taken off guard. It was also stated that Americans weren’t content with how they viewed themselves which i think is still a present day issue. We as Americans are too wrapped up in our everyday lives that if and when we are photographed off guard we might even seem a bit unhappy much like the photographs in Franks book.

The infamous photograph of the fallen soldier during the spanish civil war has raised many questions of authenticity. According to Richard Whelan, he claims that some may argue that the photograph is in fact a fake. While others would argue that it is indeed a factual photograph. In the article Whelen brings about possible scenarios that could have taken place before, during, and after the picture was taken. While the arguments may be convincing and even questionable, i honestly do not think it matters if the photograph was a fake or not. It wouldn’t be the first time a photograph is staged. Photographers have been doing it for years and still do. During this time, this photograph was so necessary. It was an “inside look” into what war was. It was an eye opener for many. These people during this time have never seen anything like it and it truly became a phenomenon. A part of me wants to believe that the photograph was staged but the other part of me doesn’t think it should matter if it was or wasn’t. The photograph did exactly what it was suppose to; show something that no one else could see unless they were there. The article had some supporting evidence of authenticity but even some of the evidence was questionable. We will NEVER know.

Food photography for art is more manipulative than food photography for marketing. What i mean by this is that when the photography is for art it can be made to be whatever the photographer wants it to be while photography for marketing is more of a “by the book” type of photography. Art photography can be made to look ugly, messy, and beautiful all in the same shot. Food photography for marketing is more of the pretty flawless picture that we’re all mostly used to. We can all be food art photographers all you need is a phone with a decent camera, a social network like Instagram, Facebook, or twitter, a few bucks for lunch and voila! A lot of people take their food photography seriously and even make a living of it. Martin Parr was a realistic photographer when it came down to his food photography. A lot of people now a days are getting paid to make restaurants look good and to paint the pretty picture to bring it clientele. Absolutely nothing wrong with either. However because we’re used to everything being photographed without flaws and made to be seen as edible we tend to forget that nothing and no one is perfect. For example when we see a commercial for McDonald’s and see a cheeseburger that looks pretty darn good and when it comes down to it the item looks nothing like the picture of commercial. McDonald’s and other commercialized franchises do the exact same thing. Martin Parr shows the good, the bad, and the imperfect which more people should appreciate. I mean why wouldn’t you? Because it isn’t beautiful? There is beauty in everything. I do not prefer one or the other but a less manipulated and raw/uncensored approach would be more appreciated. Yes, i like my food to look nice and be presented lovely but if it looks perfect on a picture and not perfect on my plate you are selling me dreams! Be about it!