Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Eagle_Arm t1_iux0l98 wrote

Reply to comment by pizzapal84 in Another fake foliage pic from a big influencer by Twombls

When you look at a painting, is it real? Did that moment in time actually exist or is it a reconstruction?

A photograph is a legitimate capture of time. It's a real, quantifiable thing. There are crime scene photos, not crime scene paintings. We use 'mug shots.' We sell products with photos, people date others based on photos, history is documented via photos.

Photos can be art, but they should be considered art and labeled as such. People get upset with manipulative photos because it is trying to pass of a lie using a medium that is used to show truth. That's where the anger comes from.

Nobody looks at a painting and says, 'the trees aren't that color....a mountain doesn't look like that.' Because it's a painting, it isn't there to tell the truth, it's there to be a painting. Photos show truth and when that truth is altered, it's a lie.

2

October7_7 t1_iuy67er wrote

tl;dr

0

Eagle_Arm t1_iuyjcvh wrote

Which part didn't you like?

2

October7_7 t1_iuz2vdy wrote

I ain't reading all that shit tl:dr

−1

Eagle_Arm t1_iuz3z5u wrote

But you did read it. Why act like you didn't?

But here's your tl:dr.

1

October7_7 t1_iuz7ovd wrote

>implying I read it

Cope harder dude

−1

Eagle_Arm t1_iuz93pe wrote

That's not really what coping is or even the proper use of the word... I'm also inferring that you read it because replying to it without reading would be dumb.

Also, it would overall take less time to read it rather than asking for a tl:dr, reloading it, and then reading that. Saying tl:dr is a 'meh' joke, but you read it already. I'm assuming you could read it at least. You've already used cope and implying wrong, so maybe not.

You can continue further with the joke if you want. I'm assuming you'll ask for the tl:dr for this message too.

tl:dr: you either read it and made a lazy joke or you're dumb. Maybe both. Probably both.

1