I missed the original post. Besided knowing us better, what did you want to use the info. for? SteveS ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marilyn" <marilyn@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 6:53 PM Subject: Re: The great debate > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <shy_mel_photo@xxxxxxxx> > To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" > <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 12:23 PM > Subject: Re: The great debate > > > Thank you, Shyrell. I appreciate your help and input. Not only does this > give me information I need, It's interesting to find out more about our > fellow PhotoForum members. > > Take Care, > > Marilyn > > > Hi Marilyn, > > I'll take the challenge. > > > > *Why did you choose being a photographer over being a painter or other > > type of artist? > > Never made that choice. Having studied both, I do both. Photography is > > instant satisfaction. Painting and sculpture takes longer but produces > > satisfaction as well. > > > > *Do you consider photography an art? Yes. > > Why? Photography and painting both have learned techniques. Students are > > able to study from masters in both areas. Things to consider are lighting > > and composition. There is also subject and color placement, color > > saturation, mood and evoked emotion. As in what is considered to be "Fine > > Art", people, places and things are considered for subject matter. The > > artist gets an idea, begins pulling together possible supplies needed and > > begins work. At any given point the artist will stand back, take a look > > and see if what is developing is to his (her) liking. Same for > > photographers. People, places, things are all subject matter. They get an > > idea, gather supplies, begin work, look over their prints and either stop > > or go on. Now there is controversy among artists (painters) as to whether > > or not painting from photographs is "real" art or is it only art when the > > painter is outside with his canvas or using a live model. For me, because > > of health problems, I do a lot of "fine art" painting from photographs. I > > still consider this art as well as the photo I may be using. For collage > > work, "fine art" artists will destroy photographs and reattach them to > > other things. For my portraits, still, I use photographs. But again there > > is lighting, color, subject placement, etc. For me, it is all art. > > Why not? > > > > *Name aspects of painting (drawing, sculpting, etc.) that are in common > > with photography. > > See above. > > *Aspects that are not in common. > > > > *Do you know of any people who are painters or sculptors and > > photographers and successful in both areas? Me, but I'm not famous. > > Though I was, for a time, developing a good reputation in this area. > > (Then my son died and I dropped out for a long time.) If you're > > interested I'll be happy to share my credits with you privately. > > Can you give me names so I can research these people? > > > > Shyrell > > > > On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 06:20:43 -0700 Marilyn <marilyn@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Hello PhotoForum Members: > >> I can use some help, please. I will be makiing a presentation before > > an art > >> association and I want to discuss the differences and similarities of > >> painting and photographery. Would you please give me your opinions > > about > >> the following subjects and answer any questions you would care to. I > > would > >> really appreciate it. > >> Thank you. > >> Marilyn > > > > > > > > > >
