Photos are the medium for art (Page 4): There are nay sayers and critics about anything. You just ignore them, as they know nothing, and contribute nothing, save gloom and doom. To...

stanperry Loc: Spring Hill, Florida

There are nay sayers and critics about anything. You just ignore them, as they know nothing, and contribute nothing, save gloom and doom. To them, one can say; if you don’t think you’re an artist, then you are not. As for me, creating art is far more important than talking about it. Have a nice gloomy day.

traderjohn Loc: New York City

Darkroom317 wrote:

So by that logic the people at Ilford are the artists because they created the contrast filters, chemicals and multi-contrast paper that I use in the darkroom. I guess I do deserve a little credit though since I created my dodging wands and burning cards.

Tools and software allow us to do things, but the creativity to apply them to visually express our vision comes from the human mind.

I think you have it reversed. The electronic instrument allows you accomplish what otherwise you can not. Moving an electronically controlled slider is knowledge, not art.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

traderjohn wrote:

I think you have it reversed. The electronic instrument allows you accomplish what otherwise you can not. Moving an electronically controlled slider is knowledge, not art.

Process is a means to an end. Yes, it is knowledge not art but if it is used with creative intent it can aid in the creation of art. The art is not the process but is the final artwork and the concept behind it.

stanperry Loc: Spring Hill, Florida

Moving a mechanically controlled brush on canvas is not art. Many have proven that. Only in the product can one see art, and it is or isn’t because of how the audience perceived it. Andy Warhol’s soup can is/was considered art.....how in the world can anyone think that? The Mona Lisa and a soup can described by the same word? Yet they are. Art/beauty are in the eye of the beholder. I believe that some of my photographs and some of my paintings are art. Most are not. Therein lies the answer for me. And perhaps those who argue that photography is not are are correct...about their own. Almost 100% of photographers and painters alike are just that. Very very few are artists.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Traderjohn's first statement, "Photography is not art" indicates that he has chosen to reject 150+ years of history. Attempting to have a conversation with him, let alone change his viewpoint, is kind of like arguing politics or religion, don't you think?

What happened to the discussion about the OP's much more interesting question, So what do we teach first to a youngster, artistic vision or technical proficiency?

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Linda From Maine wrote:

Traderjohn's first statement, "Photography is not art" indicates that he has chosen to reject 150+ years of history. Attempting to have a conversation with him, let alone change his viewpoint, is kind of like arguing politics or religion, don't you think?

What happened to the discussion about the OP's much more interesting question, So what do we teach first to a youngster, artistic vision or technical proficiency?

To me artistic vision is far more important than technical proficiency. One can be the most technically proficient and create a perfect photograph, but without artistic vision it might be the most uninteresting and meaningless image. However, depending upon one's aesthetic technical proficiency can go far in helping one convey their vision in the best way possible.

In his essay Camera Lucida, Roland Barthe's agues that Punctum, personal interest in the viewer, uncontrolled by the image creator, outweighs Studium, the universal and cultural understanding of the image.

My most well received work, Vanished Expressions, is perhaps my least technically proficient. The images are far from perfect but they aren't intended to be. The work is far more interesting aesthetically and conceptually and draws upon more emotionally.

Children are inherently creative and more mentally flexible than adults. These qualities should be encouraged. Artistic vision should be taught alongside the technical aspects.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Darkroom317 wrote:

...Children are inherently creative and more mentally flexible than adults. These qualities should be encouraged. Artistic vision should be taught alongside the technical aspects.

I knew a woman who was involved with Head Start programs in art. She reminded me of how, when we grew up, coloring outside the lines or using a color other than reality, were considered wrong. How terrible that mindset was (is it still around?).

btw, your website is hugely inspiring. Thank you for hanging around UHH!!

traderjohn Loc: New York City

Linda From Maine wrote:

Traderjohn's first statement, "Photography is not art" indicates that he has chosen to reject 150+ years of history. Attempting to have a conversation with him, let alone change his viewpoint, is kind of like arguing politics or religion, don't you think?

What happened to the discussion about the OP's much more interesting question, So what do we teach first to a youngster, artistic vision or technical proficiency?

I guess a different belief is not tolerated so well. I don't think 150 years of history is crammed with the concept that taking a picture is art. If you need to be known as an artist so be it.
I do not believe it is a steadfast dyed in the wool belief that yes; a picture is art. It may be the minority wants to make it so. Yes, it is a lot like arguing religion or a political belief. There is no empirical conclusion. Only a belief. Just because you don't think as I do I would not demean you by thinking a conversation is useless. Why should I change my viewpoint? Because I am told too?

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

traderjohn wrote:

I guess a different belief is not tolerated so well...

Reference your time spent in UHH's The Attic

traderjohn wrote:

Just because you don't think as I do I would not demean you by thinking a conversation is useless...

And yet you've been demeaning people in this thread for three pages. I'm sure we're now at the point where we're just disagreeing on perception vs. intent. I had hoped to re-focus the thread back to the original premise, but I apparently failed. Onward!

traderjohn Loc: New York City

Linda From Maine wrote:

And yet you've been demeaning people in this thread for three pages. I'm sure we're now at the point where we're just disagreeing on perception vs. intent. I had hoped to re-focus the thread back to the original premise, but I apparently failed. Onward!

How have I demeaned anyone?? I have only stated that I do not think pictures are art. I have not personnel said a derogatory thing to any individual. My view is different than theirs and yours. That's allowed.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Linda From Maine wrote:

I knew a woman who was involved with Head Start programs in art. She reminded me of how, when we grew up, coloring outside the lines or using a color other than reality, were considered wrong. How terrible that mindset was (is it still around?).

Businesses are starting to look for creatives because they find many in the business world lack flexibility. A lot of the classes I took in art school resolved around critical thinking and problem solving, primarily 3D design and sculpture. I've noticed several people in corporations don't understand file types and resolution when sending logo files for me to work with at my engraving and printing job.

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-businesses-hire-artists

https://www.creativityatwork.com/arts-in-business-applying-the-arts-to-organisational-learning/amp/

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Linda From Maine wrote:

btw, your website is hugely inspiring. Thank you for hanging around UHH!!

Thank you

TheDman Loc: USA

traderjohn wrote:

I think you have it reversed. The electronic instrument allows you accomplish what otherwise you can not. Moving an electronically controlled slider is knowledge, not art.

Knowing where to set the camera, what to include in your frame and how to process it is the art, though.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

traderjohn wrote:

Darkroom 327's website is product related. So their biases would lean in that direction. The use of paint and brush is all on a human. Not an electronic tool. Then further enhanced by more electronic tools.

PS: what are your credentials to make such statement?

tdekany Loc: Oregon

Traderjohn. So why not say painting isn’t art, because the brush and canvas are man made.

Also let me ask? If photography isn’t art, how come you can’t photograph a winner?

I guess when one isn’t creative, it is only logical to not blame oneself. This is one of, if not the most ignorant posts I have ever read on a photo forum.