Painting takes years of practice, as with clay or stone. But photography
requires the same dedication in that only the lucky beet the odds. But they
are no different than the one-hit wonders of the music industry. But that
one song was indeed very popular. Look at the author of "To Kill a Mocking
Bird." Was she an artist?
-----Original Message-----
From: Klaus Knuth
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 1:10 AM
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
Subject: Re: PHOTOFORUM digest 6427 - art ? no !
On a history level (simplified) I believe that photography put ‘traditional
painting’ at its time of invention (mid/late 19th century) out of business.
The outcome was the ascend of the ‘impressionists’ and quite all of what
came after until the present day, resulting in more individual and abstract
images - except for some movements that tried to recreate photo-realism.
I certainly agree with the notion that today photography is mostly
equivalent with “happily snapping away with an iPhone” - or whatever else.
From what I’ve heard there have been more pictures taken in the last year or
so than in the whole history of photography before. I don’t doubt that.
Social networks are the name of the game today and nobody seems to care
about quality. On the same level: CD audio quality is still on the same
level as in the 1980s. Nobody buys CDs anymore, but rather listens to
compressed files of lesser quality on itunes ...
However, all of that does not change one fact: A “great picture” is a
“great picture” - no matter if it is done in oil, watercolor, acrylics or as
a photograph. Photography just added another dimension to the game. Does it
still receive proper appreciation?
Just my humble opinion,
Klaus
On Jan 7, 2014, at 3:32 AM, Dan Mitchell <danmdan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And here I must re-enter the lists, as I have never been convinced,
despite what some are seem to be saying, that photography is ever "ART".
Art, for me, is e.g. drawing or painting with real paint, whether oil,
gouache, egg-tempera, or whatever; or hacking out the "Three Graces" from
a huge lump of marble.
Photography is something different - as someone has, more or less, said -
any fool with a phone these days can take an award winning photo., if
happily in the right place at the right time. To the great majority out
away from our cloistered world photography is just happy snaps, records of
visits, sometimes evidence - but rarely "ART" - very few will have an
Ansel Adams print on their walls, and even fewer would ever consider
photography arty enough to pay the enormous sums demanded for an A.A.
original print.
Dan Mitchell
danmdan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 7 Jan 2014, at 04:01, List for Photo/Imaging Educators -
Professionals - Students <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Be grateful to have some real artists on this list. Art can be
offensive at times. Part of the job.
Just some thoughts.
Klaus
