____twoism

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160262507213&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:GB:1123

"Boards of Canada
(Calling ALL Collectors)

Stunningly Beautiful
(one off) Original Photograph: Not Available in Mainstream...

Purchased by me directly from their Photographers Exhibition Collection in 2002 in Edinburgh, Scotland.

Offering a unique glimpse into the life of Boards of Canada.
(Small inscription on back from Photographer to me!)

(In perfect - mint condition)"

A photo?
For $153 AUD?
(it's $149 USD for the US fellows here)

some people get too carried away.. i don't know if anyone would buy it.. i mean the kalidoscope @ 160 dollars or so makes sense since it's a precious collectors item, but a photograph, i don't know.

cheers anyway

Does it strike anyone else as kind of odd that BoC would exhibit a portrait shot at a photography exhibition? I don't know, maybe it's just me, but it feels like the last thing I'd want to submit for a photo exhibition would be a shot of myself.

turquoise70 wrote:Does it strike anyone else as kind of odd that BoC would exhibit a portrait shot at a photography exhibition? I don't know, maybe it's just me, but it feels like the last thing I'd want to submit for a photo exhibition would be a shot of myself.

The band didn't exhibit these prints. They were exhibited by the photographer as part of a show of his own work back in 2002.

care to comment on the myspace video they uploaded?...

john fonda wrote:care to comment on the myspace video they uploaded?...

Who? BOC? I couldn't see anything on their MySpace. Explain please.

shud be in their vids,robot singing...

i just see the dayvan video

click on VIDEOS,it is in their favourites...

mdg wrote:

turquoise70 wrote:Does it strike anyone else as kind of odd that BoC would exhibit a portrait shot at a photography exhibition? I don't know, maybe it's just me, but it feels like the last thing I'd want to submit for a photo exhibition would be a shot of myself.

The band didn't exhibit these prints. They were exhibited by the photographer as part of a show of his own work back in 2002.

ahh, yeah that makes a lot more sense then.

mdg wrote:

turquoise70 wrote:Does it strike anyone else as kind of odd that BoC would exhibit a portrait shot at a photography exhibition? I don't know, maybe it's just me, but it feels like the last thing I'd want to submit for a photo exhibition would be a shot of myself.

The band didn't exhibit these prints. They were exhibited by the photographer as part of a show of his own work back in 2002.

Is that one of PIC's images?

Moebius wrote:

mdg wrote:

turquoise70 wrote:Does it strike anyone else as kind of odd that BoC would exhibit a portrait shot at a photography exhibition? I don't know, maybe it's just me, but it feels like the last thing I'd want to submit for a photo exhibition would be a shot of myself.

The band didn't exhibit these prints. They were exhibited by the photographer as part of a show of his own work back in 2002.

Is that one of PIC's images?

yes!

Some of the other pictures that seller has up for auction are real nice. The Clark one, the other BoC pic..

So PIC took all of those? Signature looks the same..

I emailed the seller, seems to check out.

Was it someone here who bought the other photo?

Huh.

pretty lame. who the fuck would spend that kind of cash on that?

folk with more cash than IQ

hungry_manweaselbeast wrote:folk with more cash than IQ

ah, the stuff of life: if you have to have 'it', you just have to have...

yeah but its NOT original! It's a print out! It's not like it was the first developed print that came out of the dark room. lame.