I fully understand experimenting with ones art. Without that there would be no advancement in technique. What bothers me is when the technique becomes more important than the end result, such as the use of the contents of the used condoms or menstrual fluid and such. Like I said before, some of his work seemed to be more about what he used to make the prints than the subject themselves. His use of bodily fluids is for shock value and nothing else, imho.
As far as his water dipped prints go, to me he has removed the original subject and created an abstraction of it. I have no problems with abstract art and quite enjoy some of it. However, I'm not fond of being told what I should be looking at. If that has to be explained in words, the work has failed in my eyes.
The title of this thread notwithstanding, I see art in a lot of things. From house framers to plumbers to furniture builders to science to nature. Some people call some of those things crafts, I think they go a lot deeper than that.
And I prefer black velvet tiger paintings to dogs playing poker.