Photography as an Art Form?

This obnoxious kid got pissed at me because I said "I like how anyone that can operate a DSLR these days is a Photographer" in a sarcastic manner, meaning that Photography is a current trend and a lot of teens are doing it because it's "cool". I didn't actually say this to him but made it my Facebook status and he got pissed off because he had just bought a new SLR and it applied pretty heavily to him.





Anyway, he pretty much said I was a pretentious hipster (which I'm not) and that I "just can't take the fact that anyone can take a picture and be an artist". This royally pissed me off but I was polite because at the time I couldn't think of anything offensive to say back without sounding like an idiot





Anyway, the reasons I think photography is a poor art form is because:





A. No creativity. When you take a photo, you’re using a tool to save a copy of a scene even if that scene is incredibly beautiful. Now the exception is if you use certain lighting and editing techniques to make the photo genuinely original.





B. Anyone can do it. Especially with today’s auto-focusing, auto-metering, easy-to-use cameras, meaning that a lot of idiots an pick up an SLR and pretend to be a great artist.





C. No talent involved. You’re in a good place, you take a good picture. You’re in a bad place; you get nothing. It doesn’t matter if you have passion or willpower. If someone else is in the right place at the right time, they can easily capture the moment just as well, even if they’ve been handed a camera for the first time.





D. It's usually completely Literal, metaphors and ideology can be illustrated much better through painting, drawing, or music.





E. If you make money off of taking photo's (for National Geographic as an example), then your not an artist, you're a businessman.





Now there are some exceptions, there are photographers who create their own scenes, like my friend for example. He sets up certain themes and uses models to depict said themes, he uses editing and light effects and all that deliciousness. I think he's a great artist, but that's because he's creating something new, not just digitally saving a scene.





I think the reason that Photography has caught on is because anyone born with arms can do it. The same can be said about painting or drawing or music, but those require months or even years of Practice and a more metaphorical message can be conveyed through them.





Now, I'm not trying to be a jerk, and I know there are a lot of Great photographers out there, but I think a lot of people are doing it just to be hip and happening.





So, what's your opinion? And you can be critical, just don't be a complete asshole.|||I will reserve judgment of your comments until I see a link to some examples of your photography. Until that time, I will assume that you are simply uninformed.



No - one comment for now. If Rembrandt sold his paintings to buy dinner, does that mean that he was a businessman and not an artist? I deal with gallery artists ALL THE TIME and they are all selling their work. This does not make them businessmen to the exclusion of being artists. An artist has to be a good businessman if he/she wants to continue to create art. Even paint isn't free.



~~~



I think maybe we misread you position. You did say that your original comment was sarcastic, so I think that perhaps you agree with most of the answers here.



You certainly capture the essence of what most of your detractors are saying when you talk about your friend who anticipates the scene and creates something new. Simply pointing a camera at something and pushing a button is not creating art. That is merely recording reality. At times, ANYONE can come up with an esthetically pleasing version of reality. I admit it. I do this at times. One of my "most artistic" images was a total fluke. This shot was totally accidental. I didn't have the camera to my eye and I didn't even mean to press the shutter button. In spite of that, I think it captures some of the color and excitement of professional motorcycle racing. To say that the girl in the background is "wide-eyed with anticipation" is an understatement. http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstei… This proves that even a monkey could come up with a decent picture under the right circumstances and given a certain amount of luck.



A lot of what I shoot is journalistic, but I try to give the public an alternate way of viewing something - when that is appropriate.



Back to creating an image... My handle here pokes fun at the ego of a lot of kidz who think they are ready to sell pictures or serve as the photographer at their cousin's wedding within a week after buying a DSLR. Much of the time, I am simply a picture taker. I know that I will get exactly what I want about 99% of the time, because I understand the mechanics of photography. When I cover an event, I pre-plan a lot of what I shoot. To a degree that is the first step in creating art. That sets me (and many others here) apart from the obnoxious kid who thinks he has already surpassed the great photographers in history because he occasionally gets lucky with his camera. (pun intended) Even when covering an auto race, I need to think about where to position myself at different times of the day to not only capture the action, but to take advantage of the background, the natural lighting - which changes throughout the day, the fan reaction, and any number of other factors that are beyond my control. Pre-planning will make a difference between my shots and those of a rank amateur, though.



Well, I am trying to avoid a rant here and I think you get it. I think your question has produced some insightful answers. Maybe that was even your intention in the first place.



For what it's worth, I started tagging some of my stuff "is this art" for discussions such as this. You won't like some of this, but some of it will probably appeal to you. Who knows. Out of over 100 images, there is only one that is totally dumb luck. A couple are "educated luck." The rest are all images that required forethought and technical understanding on my part. Glance at the thumbnails and, even with a question as subjective as "Is this art?" I think you'll find at least a couple that you enjoy. http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstei…|||What a nice comment! I hope everyone who was following this question comes back to read it. I'll pass it along to my friends.

Report Abuse

|||The fact that you couldn't think of anything to say back for fear of sounding like an idiot should have lead you to do some research on the subject, and actually learned enough to come here and post intelligent questions to increase your understanding rather than post ill-conceived statements. It doesn't sound like you or your friend have any knowledge of the subject you are discussing.


Do you have a question?|||Yes, it's an art form. Even camera phone photography or (original mono screen, white brick) Gameboy camera photography.





Maybe your question was meant to read something like... "Is all photography GOOD art?"





Even then who's to judge, as art is subjective.|||A) LOTS of creativity..take a look at edward weston. i mean he took a picture of a toilet and it came out beautifully. photography is seeing something in a way that you wouldnt normally. Then if you want to get into glass plate negatives and film photography and filters and lenses...





B) Yes anyone can take a picture but not anyone can make a photograph. photographers can tell the difference between auto and manual. putting it on all those settings is a cheating way of takeing pictures (although i do use them occasionally when im not trying to make art though)





C) i would like to see you recreate the work of weston or cunningham. since theres no talent involved id like to see you take them with the same quality (it was before photoshop too so you cant blame it on that.)





D) Unless you create a scene (aka use props and models...manipulate what youre shooting) this i can somewhat agree with





E) Not all artists are rich and can do art for a hobby. Are you saying then people who seel their paintings are no longer artists either? im sure NG workers sincerely apologize for finding a career in a field that they love





yes i know alot of teenagers do it just for the hell of it and they arent very good but deviantart is full of nontalent...yes photography has become a fad but alot of the REAL photographers/artists have gone back to the older styles with glass plate negatives and daguerreotypes.





a girl who owns 7 35mm cameras 5 large format cameras 2 speedgraphix 1 DSLR and a point and shoot's opinion|||anything can be classed as art... cos there otherwise people like Damien Hirst would be looking for a proper job!!!





photographers can be classed as artists, because they "paint with light"...





personally, i do not class my photography as art... just a way to spend some time, capturing moments in time, and sharing them with other like minded people...|||I will not spend lots of time on my answer for a couple of reasons.





1. I am seeing this 14 hours after posting, and I have found they typically answers get ignored by the asker after a few hours.





2. You already have some great answers and I would basically be repeating them.





I will just add this. You actually make good some good points. Where I feel your largest shortcoming is understanding the differences between a skilled photographer / artist and the average Joe Blow camera toting button pusher. From digesting your statements, I feel you think there is a fine line between these two types. That is where you are wrong. There is not a fine line, ..... there is a canyon, a gulf, a universe separating them!





Photography does give the majority of people a chance to enter into an artistic medium, but so does painting or sculpting or drawing or glass blowing for that matter. It is just much easier to buy and carry a camera. But the single act of having a camera does not in any way magically enable that person to take, and certainly not create, a great photograph. It is an acquired skill that takes study and practice like any other.





I will close with this. I often go out of my way to find places that are NOT "good" for photography. This is where creativity and skill and camera control come into play, ... to try to create something out of nothing. Also, many of these have sold and been on display in various art galleries, but that most surely does not make me a "businessman". I would have starved years ago if I had to survive on what photos I sell. lol





Anyway, here are some samples of photography that tends to contradict much of your points. These were all taken with a cheap toy camera on film, and I can promise you, it is not something that everyone can do if they were holding the exact same camera:





http://www.lightanon.com/-/lightanon/gal…





steve|||I suggest answering your question by yourself. Purchase or borrow a camera and see how easy it is to take those pictures that anyone can take. If you don't post a photo which I could say is art, does that mean it isn't good art to you or someone else?





I have met some artists who detested their favorite medium when they were young(er) and your strong dislike for photography as a credible art form could come from a hidden desire to take masterpiece photos.





Hey, many stranger things have happened ~





Lastly, if you're not into it, don't spoil something for someone else when you don't have to. I agree with some of the content in your question but having opinions is no excuse for rude behavior. I am glad you posted here to get it off your chest.|||yes its an art form.... now yes everyone things there a professional photographer but obviously there photos will prove otherwise if there not. most teens are just amateurs but there are some teens who are already working as a photographer doing weddings.|||A. When you paint a landscape, you're using a tool to recreate that landscape! How you interpret that landscape in the medium you've chosen is what makes you an artist. I'm a photographer that's used film %26amp; digital for 35+ years and I use the camera as a tool to not only capture moments but also in a creative way. But then again I use light creatively %26amp; don't shoot on Auto anything - I decide exposure.



B. You have a good point %26amp; it's true that photography in the digital age has led to a LOT of mediocre photography because it is relatively cheap %26amp; easy. But if all you do is point %26amp; shoot, then you end up with average pictures. Notwithstanding what settings you camera is on (Auto or Manual), a GOOD image that makes you stop %26amp; stare still has visual impact, and that means either in subject matter, or it's conforming to the artistic rules of composition (which is where most newbies to photography fall down).



C. I disagree with this - being in a great place doesn't make a great picture necessarily. There's plenty of cr@p examples of pretty places! It just might mean you take the same picture as everybody else that stood there. The artistic side (%26amp; what requires some effort) is being at that place %26amp; seeing it differently, or taking the time to see it when others don't.



D. I disagree - photography has always been the basis for some artists on which to build a visual art work, through image manipulation, either digitally or by standard darkroom techniques.



E. Again I think this point is a nonsense - there are plenty of artists I know in various media that sell their work.



I think you are generalising between photography and GOOD photography. Sure, 'anyone can do it', but it takes skill, knowledge %26amp; talent to do it WELL. There is also the difference between pure 'record' photography (where an accurate record of a scene is required) and artistic photography.



Or to put it another way - it's the difference between TAKING a photograph and MAKING a photograph.





You do make an entirely valid point though about the plethora of (principally) teen photographers who buy a camera, take snapshots %26amp; think they're an 'artist' or even a good photographer. Everything on Auto, no thought to composition, Dutch tilt, converse trainers %26amp; post processed to hell %26amp; gone - we see 'em all on here. And boy, do they get arsey when you try to tell them.



But don't disregard the rest of us, who have been honing our craft for years. Oh and for the record, I do not consider myself an artist - just a photographer!