Who is the Artist? I know this subject has come up before - with various responses - but basically it seemed that if a picture had been post processed it was considered that the...

Crwiwy Loc: Devon UK

I know this subject has come up before - with various responses - but basically it seemed that if a picture had been post processed it was considered that the processor was the artist.

I took the point of some of you that if I process a picture - then I am the artist.

However>>

So I now take a flat picture with little merit and drop it into a program such as Photomatrix Essentials and press a button. Suddenly I have a picture that is transformed and has a wow factor.

If I used the program defaults - surely the program is now the artist unless I have changed some of the settings. I would no more be the artist than if I had just sent the picture to a lab for artistic processing?

Or is/are the person(s) who designed the program the artist(s)?

MJ HawkSpirit Loc: Lancaster County, PA

Ah ha...I have thought of this many a time, whether behind a camera or painting a picture. I may start something here, but that is not my intention, just my belief. Creator I.E. God is the true ARTIST we are all copy cats.

ncshutterbug

I see it the way I would look at a decorated piece of clothing. There is the manufacturer and the decorator. You did both so you are still the artist. With a piece of clothing it was manufactured by someone else, but you sew on beads, paint, embroider or whatever, you are applying your artistry to someone else's manufactured item. I think PP is real artistry, as you choose the look of the final product, where someone else may choose totally different treatments.

UP-2-IT Loc: RED STICK, LA

Crwiwy wrote:

I know this subject has come up before - with vari... (show quote)

Did that amazing program start by itself, did it decide what you wanted the picture to represent? Which was first, the chicken or the egg?

UP-2-IT Loc: RED STICK, LA

MJ HawkSpirit wrote:

Ah ha...I have thought of this many a time, whether behind a camera or painting a picture. I may start something here, but that is not my intention, just my belief. Creator I.E. God is the true ARTIST we are all copy cats.

Agreeable but you need to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. Also think God has his hands full with other problems, pretty sure he is saying something like Okay man, don't dissapoint me now, I gave you a brain use it.

ncshutterbug

Really, needles, thread, paints etc. are all manufactured by someone else. They are just aids in the final creation. We're not lucky enough to do it the way God does. Don't think we could come any where close if we could.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

MJ HawkSpirit wrote:

Ah ha...I have thought of this many a time, whether behind a camera or painting a picture. I may start something here, but that is not my intention, just my belief. Creator I.E. God is the true ARTIST we are all copy cats.

Sounds like Plato's mimetic theory

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

The art of photography comes not from the post processing but from the photographers from the intent and the image. Photography is just one medium of art. The composition and the feelings invoked in the viewer are what makes it art. Photography is similar to design in its arrangement of objects within a space.

Crwiwy Loc: Devon UK

UP-2-IT wrote:

Did that amazing program start by itself, did it decide what you wanted the picture to represent? Which was first, the chicken or the egg?

All I did was to drop the picture in and press the button - everything else was program defaults and the result is random. Some pictures look really good on the default setting some don't. Surely more luck than artistry?

The original picture was taken by the photographer but had not worked out as planned - the software made the picture into a quite pleasing result. No intelligence or artistry.

Surely artistry requires thought - otherwise is is chance rather than artistry.

Is a champion chess player an artist?
If so - does that make 'Big Blue' the chess playing computer an artist because it beat a champion?

Big blue is just a calculating machine that works through possible moves before choosing the one most likely to succeed - no intelligence involved.

mdorn Loc: Portland, OR

Crwiwy wrote:

I know this subject has come up before - with vari... (show quote)

I'll be the judge of WOW factor... please post your picture. :-) You might be just impressed with the software?

Crwiwy Loc: Devon UK

mdorn wrote:

I'll be the judge of WOW factor... please post your picture. :-) You might be just impressed with the software?

It is individual preferences as has been cited on UHH many times - one persons wow may be anothers yuk! This is more a theoretical question than actual picture critique.

Crwiwy Loc: Devon UK

MJ HawkSpirit wrote:

Ah ha...I have thought of this many a time, whether behind a camera or painting a picture. I may start something here, but that is not my intention, just my belief. Creator I.E. God is the true ARTIST we are all copy cats.

Wouldn't it be nice if members of this photographic site stuck to photography and left God out of it. We want considered answers - not religious rhetoric please. In these PC times we are supposed to consider the many members who may not follow your god.

kitcar Loc: Liverpool.Merseyside. UK

Crwiwy wrote:

I know this subject has come up before - with vari... (show quote)

I myself can't see it makes much difference (I'm not really au-fait about ethics reasoning) unless you are worried about a lawsuit.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Your are the artist the moment you hit the shutter

mdorn Loc: Portland, OR

Darkroom317 wrote:

Your are the artist the moment you hit the shutter

No. The camera is the artist! That's why you need a Nikon. :-)