[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Settings Home
/p/ - Photography

4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 7 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]

What do you guys think of Peter Lik?
How did he manage to make so much money from his photos?
>how does any photographer manage to get famous and rich?
Find your audience and target them. Impressionable plebs that like kitsch is his.
well he sold a single print for 6.5 million dollars
Did he, though? Before that, the most he ever made from an art auction for the sale of a single photograph was roughly $16,000.

The $6.5 mill price tag will probably never be confirmed because it was through a private sale.

In the end, his photos cater to the people that have more money than taste and common sense.
His prints are genuinely incredible. I live in San Diego, and he's got a gallery in an area here called La Jolla. The first time I walked into his gallery, it was pretty incredible. 10 foot wide panoramas that are pin sharp even if you stand super close to them. Great frames, great lighting, great design in the gallery. Are they over priced? Yes, very. But obviously people are buying them so I guess they're priced just right.

In the past few years, many other photography galleries have opened on the same street, some just a few doors down from Lik. It's fucking embarassing because you know everybody is comparing the photos to peter liks, and they're pretty fucking bad. The only gallery that's close to being as impressive is the National Geographic gallery, and even that isn't that good compared to Lik.

With that being said, images like those in the OP are terrible. I hate the composite images he does, and his claim of shooting film (that's what the sales guys say) the claim of not using photoshop, all that shit. I'd say that roughly 30% of the images in his gallery are purely composite images from elements not even in the same place or grossly enhanced, such as clone stamping in branches. But fuck, they look great in person
His old photos were taken with a Linhof 617 or something. But all of his recent panos are taken with either a nikon d800e, phase one, or pentax medium format. He hasn't shot film in a long time, and for good reason.

yeah, obviously. But some I suspect are still simple photographs that are just processed raw images.
eat shit
Well why don't you bend over Lik's desk and let him pound you from behind?
Well, I know you're full of shit if you don't think his prints are great in person. So your opinion is completely invalid if you can't even admit that fact
his prints look so good
anyone knows how he prints them
really interested in printing some of my good photos to hang around the house
>high dpi prints
>give him mega credit online FOR FREE
>believing he uses film
>believing he even edits his own shit anymore
>claims most of the composites are real

Fstoppers did a video discussing said photo

they found the same moon in a different shot of his, lines up perfectly. Basically just photo shopping shit now

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.