In my case, I take part in performance-oriented music and believe it is my call to show the audience something that both their eyes and ears can enjoy.
And last, it may be worthwhile trying to hang something beyond the partial wall because some of the pictures do very well in a confined space.
I wonder why people use only walls for hanging pictures.
I've exhibited quite a few of my photographs. I expand them digitally till they're very big. It's an art school thing, I suppose.
Music is about the performance.
Gift-wrap the framed artwork on your walls and rehang them - what's nicer than a wall of presents to look at?
The reason artists want to have works in museums is that we want our works to be seen by as many people as possible and we want our ideas to be understood in more complicated ways.
I just hand shoes on the wall. They're architecture you know.
Art knows neither doctrine nor idea; its nature is to show.
I was looking for some vintage furniture, and I came across this booth where they sold old pictures. This guy didn't just have things in a box; he had really curated his collection. Each image was like this little folk masterpiece.
When you sit down and see someone play at a piano, you don't think, 'Wow - what a fantastic machine.'
Furniture should always be comfortable. And always have a piece of art that you made somewhere in the home.
At a certain point, I had so much artwork that I decided to respect the art and present them in a nice way, not just on a dusty shelf.
His books are kept on freestanding shelves hung at different angles on a sea-green wall. They defy gravity, as good books should.
You don't always have to show art in what's called a white box; you can have a kind of complexity within an exhibit which actually respects the art as well.
The architect aspires to build in a city as the artist aspires to exhibit his works in a museum.
What is a well-chosen collection of pictures, but walls hung round with thoughts?
