Boris77

That is called an Illustrator. My specialty back in art school, last century.
Photography was just being accepted in assignments, so I used it too.
Boris

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I have a really good friend who just completed her MFA in Illustration. She is very kind and open, but I sense that she looks down a little bit on "ordinary" painters. Says their job is much easier, with many fewer requirements that must be satisfied. I still like her quite a lot.

Bill_de Loc: US

I still like her quite a lot.

That's funny!

---

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Part of the process of development for people in the arts is a gradual refinement of their tastes and preferences. Where tastes and preferences are concerned there's no right or wrong, but there is a whole spectrum from basic at one end to refined at the other end. People in fine arts are definitely focused on the refined end of that spectrum, and that is a basic necessity for them rather than it being a vanity or a delusion. Your friend would probably describe her tastes and preferences as refined rather than superior, but they are superior in the sense that they're a basic requirement if you want to operate successfully in the world of fine art (MFA = Master of Fine Arts).

User ID

Curiously enough, at one time my job title combined both artforms. I was very officially "Graphic Illustrator/Photographer".

(That title was not written to conveniently describe me in my HR folder, but was newly created to facilitate a recruitment search for anybody that fit.)

Flying Three Loc: Berthoud, CO

Well said!!!

Zooman 1

If it makes you feel happy go for it!

hannaco Loc: People's Republic of California

How about just putting a different name to AI? Let's call it Synthetic Photography?

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

Lovely...

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

It seems people here are forever suggesting new terms or new definitions of words, and there's no chance they will ever go into wide usage from being posted here.

hannaco Loc: People's Republic of California

How true. Just adding to the babble.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Lost in this discussion has been that much legitimate photography actually requires no artistry at all. When I take candid photographs of kids at school for the website or yearbook, there are really two considerations. First, is my photograph more interesting than the seven or eight (or maybe more) other photographs being considered for the space on the page. Second is whether mom and dad and grandma can recognize their baby (and does he look intelligent and engaged). Being a little bit artistic might provide a tiny advantage, but don't count on it. Proper exposure, color, and focus are, of course, mandatory. Surprisingly, though, the robotics team does appreciate artistic treatment in photographs used for their materials.

When I'm doing railroad photography, most of the time it's the same thing...proper angle, focus, exposure, and color. No frills or foo foo extra stuff. Just make sure to get the detail in the shaded parts where the carbody overhangs. Of course, that doesn't apply to the picture of the train in just the right impressive setting for the annual convention photo contest. There, everything counts. But remember that the winners are chosen by convention attendees, not a team of judges, so nothing too esoteric.

Anyway...just some thoughts...

hannaco Loc: People's Republic of California

Along similar lines is event photography where most images are shot to a rigid formula. It can be difficult to tell an image shot by one company from another company.

topcat Loc: Alameda, CA

I don't think that you do not have any skills. I kind of like what you do. You may not have the skills that other people do, I don't either. I just do what I can with what I see. y0u do the same. whatever we try to make is an attempt to take what we see and interpret it. A lot of people don't even do that.

Be proud of what you do. AI or real photography

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

It all sounds great to me.