David Weeeelll, that may not have been fair interpretation of what you said. - you were, I think, making a case for connoisseur-ship - a notion I support completely. As with any specialized knowledge snobbery and factions are involved. The original question had to do with which was the greater influence art or commercial (meaning snap-shooters?) photographers . I think many artists gleefully appropriate any technology they can. Snap-shooters want convenience and simplicity. The digital camera is the most important achievement since the time photography reached technical maturity around 1914. How artists use this may change art and make a significant change in the way everyday people see art. AZ Build a Lookaround! The Lookaround Book, 2nd ed. NOW SHIPPING http://www.panoramacamera.us > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: can there be art photography ... > From: "David Dyer-Bennet" <dd-b@xxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu, April 01, 2004 10:57 am > To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" > <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > lookaround360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes: > > > The notion that really good art has to be old stuff would have them > > rolling on the floor laughing. > > Good thing nobody here has suggested that, then, eh? > -- > David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@xxxxxxxx>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> > RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> > Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: > <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> > Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
