Nominierungen | Nominations

Michael Maria Müller - 22. August 2010 - -

Artificial Image Award 2010

Wir gratulieren den Gewinnern – We congratulate the winners

Yael Kaplan, Tel Aviv (1qo9c7zl) – Artificial Image [Public] Award 2010

Fred Hüning, Berlin (aqwlhc9e) – Artificial Image [Experts] Award 2010

Ting-Ting Cheng, London (kice6hi0) – Artificial Image [Edition] Award 2010

aia_wall_9ex2jc7-loaia_wall_aj72yisp-loaia_wall_ajeox7s-lowall-back-aqwlhce-loaia_wall_deb62l9-loaia_wall_du3x8l4-loaia_wall_keeib2j-lowall-empty-loaia_wall_kice6hi-loaia_wall_kivers2-loaia_wall_lwn49s-loaia_wall_nnsp9g-loaia_wall_pjn4shi-loaia_wall_s79o0s-loaia_wall_si3b7ej-loaia_wall_aq4jf84-loaia_wall_ah63ieh-loaia_wall_1qo9c7l-lo

Juroren / jurors: Katerina Valdivia Bruch, Daniela Eger,
Boris von Brauchitsch, Andreas Müller-Pohle and Hannes Wanderer
°

[9ex2jc7 - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[aj72yisp - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[ajeox7s - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[aqwlhce - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[deb62l9 - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[du3x8l4 - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[keeib2j - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[kice6hi - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[kivers2 - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[lwn49s - wall]

[nnsp9g - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[pjn4shi - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[s79o0s - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[si3b7ej - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[aq4jf84 - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[ah63ieh - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

[1qo9c7l - wall] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]

42 Kommentare zu “Nominierungen | Nominations”

Feed für diesen Beitrag Trackback-Adresse
  • Karoline Bofinger
    23. August 2010 um 10:48

    Tolle Fotos, schöne Fotowand!

  • Joulia
    23. August 2010 um 13:43

    sehr dynamisch. ein tolles und origineles bild von der großstadt.
    stimme für nominant 9ex2jc7

  • Andrea
    26. August 2010 um 08:42

    summer in the city!!!
    Stimme für 9ex2jc7

  • gorge gross
    26. August 2010 um 17:58

    I saw the most beautiful

  • Der Chaz Worthington
    27. August 2010 um 04:35

    Cool collection…I would love to own some “pjn4shi” images…for my parlour!

    …Wish I could have seen ALL these photos in person…

    …Cheers, from NYC

  • Clive
    27. August 2010 um 23:18

    xxx.com have organized a vote for xxx so the vote has been rigged.
    Please act accordingly. Thank you.

  • Michael Maria Müller
    28. August 2010 um 01:21

    @ Clive

    Many thanks for the tip and we will follow your lead, but it would help us a lot if you can provide us with evidence according your statement.

    Requests on the part of the nominated (via e-mail distribution, facebook, social networks and forums) would be absolutely legitimate from our point of view and is part of the “experiment” to do a public voting.

    Vielen Dank für den Hinweis, wir überprüfen gerade ob es sich wirklich um eine “Fälschung” handelt und bitten um Belege für diese Aussage. Eine etwaige Bitte seitens der Nominierten (über deren E-mail-Verteiler, Facebook und/oder Foren) für diese zu stimmen wäre aus unserer Sicht absolut legitim…

  • Clive
    28. August 2010 um 11:39

    yes, but “vote for my friend, you don’t even have to look at the photos”…does that sound fair to you?? Look at the vote as it currently stands - it’s not a legitimate vote, quite clearly. It’s very disappointing.

    another quote from that site: “don’t worry, his photo is far behind at the moment, but quality doesn’t enter into it. Just a case of getting as many of you to go there and vote as possible. As I said, you don’t even have to look at the pictures.”

    You did the right thing suspending the vote last night and I’m not sure why you went back on that. At least, that entry should be suspended.

  • Josefina
    28. August 2010 um 11:57

    Congratulations and good luck to all.!

  • Baron
    28. August 2010 um 15:35

    Experimentation has its place, but we so often forget the many experiments that go awry, this sadly seems to be one of those times. I do admit that X’s friend does have a valid claim in posting on the forum in question, but it undermined what the vote was about with “you don’t have to look at the photos” and “quality doesn’t enter into it.” Such statements undermine what the gallery was seeking to achieve. If quality doesn’t matter then the curatorial board that chose these 17 artists is invalid.

    The forum in question is The Hand of God in all of this and X (through no fault of his/her own, but because of the help of a friend) is the Diego Maradona. Maradona was a great footballer, but his legacy will forever be marred by the memory of that moment in 1986. In the end, Argentina did win the World Cup and Maradona now has wealth and fame.

    X will have a hollow victory. The other 16 photographers will turn away from what initially started as a noble experiment and a chance to be part of an excellent institution. X, due to the efforts of his/her friend, will be The Big Brother victor of the Berlin Photography Month, which will both undermine him/her and the gallery.

  • Phil
    28. August 2010 um 17:09

    But Clive - there is nothing in the rules against spreading the word about the competition, or requesting votes. If that were the case it would need to be outlined before voting began.

    As Michael has said “Requests on the part of the nominated (via e-mail distribution, facebook, social networks and forums) would be absolutely legitimate from our point of view and is part of the “experiment” to do a public voting.”

    This is how most public votes are run on the internet, whether you agree with it or not.

  • The Janitor
    28. August 2010 um 17:49

    @ Clive

    How do you know so much about that? You’re cited quotes are from a closed forum.

    How do you know the artist is involved in any PR for voting for her/his art?

    Are you connected to any of the entries? Demanding the entry should be suspended is quite unfair.

    If you want to push the other artists (or only your favorite) you better be ready to make some “noise” at any social network (eg. facebook, twitter, behance, …) and/or forum you know.

    This voting here is open and you don’t have to like it (I don’t) but it’s the way it is … so make the best out of it.

  • Clive
    28. August 2010 um 17:54

    I have no connection with any of the pictures. I came here from the xxx forum because I saw something unfair happening. Anyone can sign up to that forum and you’ll see the thread there pushing others to vote with the reward being photos of topless women. Don’t take my word for it…go there yourself and see it happening, even today.

    Conducting a vote that way strips the whole contest of any meritocracy and it is that which is patently unfair.

  • Clive
    28. August 2010 um 17:55

    and just to make clear… [xxx] is the entrant who is gathering “votes for boobs”.

  • Frank
    28. August 2010 um 18:57

    As an artist, I agree with all of the comments above, seeing both sides of the arguments being made. [xxx] forum is not necessarily an illegitimate means for gaining votes, but perhaps has left a bad taste in several people’s mouths. Artists are rarely publicly lauded or remunerated for their efforts in any significant way and is quite the antithesis for why many of us do what we do. Perhaps that is what leaves the sting. What began as an earnest submission of fine, individual artwork, for which all 17 should be proud, has now devolved into a competition along the lines of reality television contestants.

  • Backflip
    28. August 2010 um 19:49

    I was the one who posted the thread on that forum asking for votes for my friend. Seeing as it has caused issues, I have removed the thread - however I never thought it was against the rules or I wouldnt have done it in the fiest place.

    Its a daily occurrence to see people posting requests for votes for competitions on forums/facebook etc. I would guess that the entrants currently on 60 and 70 votes have done something similar, albeit slightly less successfully. With this in mind I would suggest that instead of complaining about it, the other entrants should do the same. It is simply the nature of a public vote on the internet.

    Also, quotes such as “dont bother looking at the images” are totally made up and did not take place in the thread. Ive no idea where they came from.

    I should also add that I posted up that link on the forum without the knowledge of the entrant. I saw them post the link on facebook and did the rest myself.

  • Clive
    28. August 2010 um 20:21

    great idea: if you’re impressed by my blatant cheating, do the same yourself. Love it! If you can’t beat them, join them, eh?

    and you know yourself the things you said on that thread. Deleting the thread has removed the evidence but not a single word I quoted was false, in fact I copied and pasted the quotes I gave. You told three people they didn’t even have to look at the photos because they had said that “photography is boring” or words to that effect.

    You’ve been caught cheating, have the decency to admit it!

    I think the fairest thing to do now is to put that entry down to zero votes and allow it to continue. It’s a fair compromise.

  • Backflip
    28. August 2010 um 20:34

    I’m not going to get into a big debate here. This will be my final comment. Two things.

    1. I never told anyone not to look at the images.
    2. A moderator has already said it is not cheating-

    “Requests on the part of the nominated (via e-mail distribution, facebook, social networks and forums) would be absolutely legitimate from our point of view and is part of the “experiment” to do a public voting.”

  • The Janitor
    28. August 2010 um 20:51

    @ Clive

    Coming up w/ big words like cheating, fairness, decency and suspension and demanding to reset the votes for a specific entry sounds more you have a problem w/ that specific artists entry.

    If you have proof(!) of vote rigging come out and show that evidence — and hunting for votes in social networks (eg. twitter, facebook, etc.), blogs or forums and even by sending out thousands of e-mails or a sophisticated script is not vote rigging.

    And keep in mind a simple thing: If you behave, you stay — if you don’t, you go.

    «I’m the janitor, maybe it’s time to scrub and wax the floor.»

  • Clive
    28. August 2010 um 22:03

    I rumbled them…the forum thread was deleted. How can I link to a forum thread that’s been deleted? If it was all innocent and permissable, why was the forum thread deleted??

    Fine, keep the votes as they are. I’ve already stated I have NO vested interest in any of the entries - I came to this site from the forum I mentioned.

    As Baron stated up the page, it’s a completely tainted victory and I’m sure the guy himself won’t be pleased at that. Maybe that’s wishful thinking.

  • Clive
    28. August 2010 um 22:10

    BTW…thread title was “Pretentious art vote rigging! You know you want to…get in now!”

    yes, all done in the right spirit, no? Tut tut.

  • Frank
    28. August 2010 um 22:39

    @ Clive - I’m sure that at the very least, the artists appreciate you speaking up. They may or may not be willing to adopt [xxx's] strategy, but it must be helpful to learn what it takes to win.

  • marky
    29. August 2010 um 01:29

    awsome

  • DoMe
    29. August 2010 um 13:46

    how pitty that this vote can not really count. We all see different photos since the photos looks diferent on every monitor

  • Jan
    30. August 2010 um 16:41

    da sind so wunderbare bilder von aqwlhce(danke!), und der photoshop, der dann das ganze in die tonne tritt.
    witzige aufnahmen bei deb62l9, die von kuenstlichen posen beraubt werden.
    kraftvolle momente bei ah63ieh, die eine serie ueberfluessig machen.
    sieger gibts hier nicht.

  • שמעונוביץ איטה
    30. August 2010 um 18:24

    קפלן יעלי- הק’ר שלך מעוצב פנטסטי!
    your wall is wounderfull

  • karo
    31. August 2010 um 15:26

    ganz wunderbare fotos […] kandidat aqwlhce

  • rocco
    31. August 2010 um 15:54

    aqwlhce

    alles wunderbare dorits

  • Clive
    1. September 2010 um 20:11

    wow, 1qo9c7l is doing really well. I wonder why. Little ol’ me didn’t have anything to do with it….honest! ;o)

  • boris
    3. September 2010 um 19:12

    1qo9c7l suddenly jumped from 288 to 421 votes, approx 1:00 pm est, September 3rd. …comments anybody?

  • Michael Maria Müller
    4. September 2010 um 10:29

    Bedauerlicherweise hat “aqwlhce” seine eingereichte Arbeit wegen der Vermutung, der plötzliche Stimmenzuwachs eines Kandidaten sei Beweis für eine “zweifelhafte Abstimmung”, zurückgezogen. Wir bedauern dies sehr, akzeptieren aber die Entscheidung des Künstlers.

    Der Verleger Andy Lim und die Violinistin Suzy Whang waren zu dieser Zeit im Atelier von Artificial Image anwesend und “Zeugen” dieses Vorgangs, worauf sich eine Diskussion über den erweiterten Kunstbegriff Josef Beuys’ entwickelte. Daher habe ich mich entschlossen, auf dessen Definition der “Sozialen Plastik” bei Wikipedia zu verlinken: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soziale_Plastik und diesen (Kommentar-)Wettstreit um diese Frage zu erweitern…

  • Members of the Biennial
    4. September 2010 um 13:03

    HOLA MI QUERIDA AMIGA FOT׃GRAFA!!!
     
    QUֹ ALEGRֽA RECIBIR NOTICIAS TUYAS!!!
    TE DESEO MUCHO ֹXITO EN BERLIN!!!
    TUS FOTOGRAFֽAS SON MUY BUENAS!!!
    GRACIAS POR ACORDARTE SIEMPRE DE
    Mֽ!!!

    GREAT PICTURES

    Beautiful!

    You hade made an increIdible piece!!!

    Good luck & happy new year

  • Zazie
    4. September 2010 um 19:21

    @ Michael — There is no doubt that Artificial Image’s intentions are pure, but the current voting system can be manipulated. This is not to say that any of the candidates have made use of the current “hole” in the system, but unless it is possible to introduce a voting system that is immune to manipulation, all votes are thrown into question.

    The idea of exploring a Joseph Beuyssian “Sozial Plastik” is very interesting, but perhaps an alternative to voting system vulnerable to manipulation in the future could be to engage ten or so “citizen curators” to select the show. At present, more discussion has been made of the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the votes than the works themselves and I don’t believe that was your intention.

  • Michael Maria Müller
    5. September 2010 um 14:03

    @ Zazie
    & all the nominated candidates

    Es war mir von Anfang an klar, dass mein Versuch, die (eingeschränkte) Öffentlichkeit (der Informierten) über eine künstlerische Arbeit abstimmen zu lassen, unwägbare Risiken in sich birgt – bis hin zur Wahlfälschung, die von einigen Kommentatoren vermutet wird, bislang aber nicht bewiesen werden kann. Trotzdem habe mich entschlossen dieses Experiment zu starten. Ich wollte herausfinden, inwieweit die Wahl der Öffentlichkeit dem Votum der Experten (der Juroren) entspricht – von denen (wie vermutet) ein jeder mindestens einen Favoriten ins Rennen geschickt hat, der überhaupt nicht das Gefallen der Fachkollegen fand.

    Eine, wie auch immer besetzte, Jury würde ebenfalls in einen Wettstreit treten, welcher der Kandidaten denn nun die “beste” oder die “preiswürdigste” Arbeit abgeliefert hat. Genau dies wird nun geschehen – Ich stifte folglich einen zweiten Preis, den Artificical Image [Experts] Award. Und um die ganze Sache schließlich und endlich abzurunden, sozusagen dem Ganzen die Krone aufzusetzen, picke ich mir aus allen nominierten Arbeiten diejenige aus, die mir persönlich am Besten gefällt und werde dem Autor die Produktion einer Edition anbieten – den Artificial Image [Edition] Award? Alle ausgezeichneten Arbeiten will ich, mit einer Dokumentation des Wettstreits, ebenfalls während des 4. europäischen Monats der Fotografie präsentieren.

    Somit hätten wir nun also
    1. den Volksentscheid,
    2. das Urteil der (Kunst-)Aristokratie und
    3. den einsamen Entschluss des Initiators.

    Schauen wir mal…

  • aqwlhce
    6. September 2010 um 19:25

    lieber michael maria müller,

    jetzt habe ich doch noch einmal auf ihre voting-seite geschaut (wie schnell süchte entstehen können) und mit erstaunen festgestellt, dass sie großzügigerweise noch zwei weitere (mir persönlich viel angenehmere) preise spendieren.

    Außerdem verweisen sie auf den von mir hochgeschätzten beuys und seinem “jeder ist ein künstler” - credo. Ich selbst bin ein absoluter seiteneinsteiger (mit 35 jahren) ohne hochschulausbildung und daher hat mir dieses credo immer geholfen und mut gemacht auf meinem weg in die welt der kunst.
    so gesehen erscheint mir auch das publikums-voting im nachhinein gleich viel sympathischer …

    die gerechte strafe für meinen freche verweigerungshaltung wäre jetzt natürlich auch der ausschluss von den beiden neuen awards (experten + sie)!
    Aber: gerechtigkeit ist doch eh eine illusion.

    ich mache ihnen daher folgenden “vorschlag”:
    sie schreiben in ihrem kommentar, dass ich (bzw. aqwlhce) mich von meinem schleichenden vorwurf der manipulation distanziert habe, mich bei ihnen dafür entschuldigt und daher wieder in den kreis der kandidaten “aufgenommen” werde - mit meinen bildern.

    in dem sie mich sozusagen wieder teilhaben lassen, bestätigt sich wiederum der gute alte beuys:
    durch meine individuelle kreativität und phantasie hätte ich dann die bedingungen des wettbewerbs nach meinem geschmack gestaltet und wäre damit ein: KÜNSTLER.

    Mit freundlichen grüssen,

    ihr aqwlhce
    berlin

  • Michael Maria Müller
    6. September 2010 um 20:26

    Lieber aqwlhce,

    ich habe vorgestern mit einem der Juroren (Andreas Müller-Pohle, den ich bereits vor längerer Zeit darüber informiert habe, dass ich einen “Experts”-Preis stiften werde) mit der Frage konfrontiert wie in Ihrem Fall vorzugehen sei. Wir beide waren (mit Bedauern) der Ansicht, dass Ihre Arbeit auch für den Juroren-Preis als nicht mehr in Frage kommend zu gelten habe – was mir aber wiederum, als ich zwei Nächte darüber geschlafen hatte, zwar als nahe liegend, aber nicht sehr plausibel erschien. Heute morgen fasste ich daher den Entschluss, Ihre Arbeit (ohne Ihr Wissen) für den Artificial Image [Experts] Award nachzunominieren. Die Überraschung im Falle eines Sieges wäre sicherlich sehr gross gewesen – mindestens so gross wie meine Überraschung über Ihren Vorschlag, den ich hiermit annehme.

  • Clive
    8. September 2010 um 18:07

    I love it when a plan comes together.

  • Robert Stanjek
    15. September 2010 um 18:10

    Also mal ganz im ernst. Die einzigen Fotografien, die hier Geschichten erzählen, sind jene von kivers2. Wie erfahre ich den Namen des Fotografen? Das ist eine wirklich tolle Installation.

  • Michael Maria Müller
    16. September 2010 um 08:26

    Die Namen der Autoren sind bis zum Ende der Abstimmung geheim. Erst wenn die Abstimmung beendet ist und die Sieger verkündet werden, werden die Codes gegen die tatsächlichen Namen getauscht.

  • Jan
    17. September 2010 um 19:35

    Wall von kivers2 hat was unglaublich konstruktives, geradliniges, ehrliches und ist nicht so abgehoben und überkünstelt. Sozusagen mit Bodenhaftung und “im Leben stehend” das gefällt mir irgendwie, es spricht einen wirklich “menschlich” an!

    aber die anderen sind natürlich auch super :) schöne Arbeiten bei, aber kivers2 gefällt mir tatsächlich am besten!

    jan

  • alfred oh
    22. September 2010 um 01:34

    wann erfährt das geneigte publikum, wer die drei ausgelobten preise (publikum, experten, mmm) gewonnen hat???

    bekanntgabe der gewinner sollte laut ausschreibung bereits am 20. september erfolgt sein …

  • Michael Maria Müller
    22. September 2010 um 17:48

    Voilá…

Kommentar schreiben