Haven't had any issues with B&H. Freestyle is wonderful and I use them for some things but a they are bit more expensive.

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.

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.

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.

Art has always been rather difficult to define. Several philosophers and critics have attempted to define it.


Here are some of their essays and theories about art and aesthetics

Emmanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment: http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/kant/section3/

Robert J. Yanal, Danto and George Dickey, Institutional Theory of Art: https://arthistoryunstuffed.com/the-institutional-theory-of-art/

John Dewey, Art as Experience: https://burnaway.org/feature/theory-in-studio-john-dewey-champion-of-art-as-experience/

Clement Greenberg, Kitsch and the Avant Garde, https://sites.psu.edu/1314passion/2014/02/06/clement-greenberg-avant-garde-and-kitsch-analysis/

What constitutes "embellishment" and does it matter? In photojournalism the manipulation of photographs is unethical because it distorts the truth. Photojournalism is expected to portray the truth of an event. However, in art it doesn't matter. William Eggleston's photographs are pretty much straight photography however, Jerry Uelsmanns photographs have been constructed. Both photographers images are art.

Furthermore a photograph is a separate entity from reality. It goes back to Magritte's, The Treachery of Images. The painting of a pipe is not a pipe but is a painting of a pipe. So often with photographs we treat the photograph as if is the same as the object that was photographed. However, it isn't and never can be.

The question of what it looked like vs what the final work looks like is a question that is rarely ever asked of painters. Given that a photograph is not reality, the notion of changing reality through staging photographs or "post-processing/ manipulation" is a moot point for artists. Only the final image, its aesthetic values and the concepts conveyed matter.

I like Basquiat's work. However, my biggest issue with the art world and the art market is the insane valuation of certain artists like Basquiat, Damien Hirst and Jeff Koons. This is more of an issue with our socio-economic system rather than an art issue.

You implied that photography is only electronic, which it isn't. You seem focused on the embellished part (processing), however, this has nothing to do with art or not. A lot of what defines art is purpose and intention. An image created as art is art from the very moment it is created. What is art is also not dependent upon craft. One can create a perfectly crafted image and have the most boring, uninteresting and meaningless image. Art is about combing aesthetics and message.

Also, a camera is not needed to produced photographs, only a light sensitive surface is required. https://hyperallergic.com/305997/a-history-of-photography-in-which-the-camera-is-absent/

Yes. The Zone System can be used with digital cameras.
https://www.alanrossphotography.com/can-the-zone-system-go-digital-2/

Furthermore art lies in expressing a concept though visual means. Photography in many ways, in the art world, has become one of the most difficult mediums for art. This is because it is has become highly conceptual and formal qualities aren't discussed as much. Technique is easy, conveying a meaningful and interesting message is more difficult. Sculpture is another medium that has had a similar conceptual push. Painting appears for the most part has retained more its formalism at least in the tradition in which I learned painting.

I use none of what you mention. No batteries and no software.

What you have posted is a very narrow view of photography. Photography is any image created by recording light with light sensitive media. This can be achieved by using a digital sensor, film, commercially coated paper, hand coated paper etc... There are a vast number of techniques beyond what you have stated.

I mostly use extremely simple (what I think is simple) equipment without automatic anything. Even when I do use my more complicated digital camera I use few of the features. This allows me to focus more on the image and the concept that it conveys without the technical getting in the way.

Artistic vision and creativity should be encouraged throughout our lives. A person with creativity can be given any camera and produce amazing work. Many photographers use "toy" plastic cameras in their work at one time or another such as Nancy Rexoth, Michael Kenna and David Burnett.

Also, here is a great and timely article by Catherine Edelman of the Edelman Gallery in Chicago on art photography. https://www.lensculture.com/articles/catherine-edelman-what-is-art-photography-catherine-edelman-offers-her-opinion

If you expect the group in this thread you will likely end up disappointed. People often can't even agree what is art and what isn't. Many philosophers have created theories and debated this matter. Often what is art or not gets tangled up in there argument of what is a good or bad art. However, to me there are two separate issues. What is good art is a matter of personal taste and interests. It is even more unlikely be agreed upon.

I happen to really like Guernica and how Picasso depicts the absolute horror of war in it. To me it is an extremely important painting both in terms of Picasso's aesthetic and as an artistic response to the chaos and tragedy going on in Europe at the time.

There will always be a place for alternative and historic photographic processes in the art world. In fact digital has been a boon for alt process as people can now make large negatives on inkjet printers whereas before they would have needed cameras 8x10 and larger. Silver gelatin printing will likely survive for quite some time as well because of the quality of prints from large format in camera negatives.

While digital has transformed the production and commercial side, in the art community it matters far less what material and process one uses. Stone lithography and letter press remain major art forms even though its commercial use fell out a while ago. Letter press is actually making a come back in some commercial applications.

There are several on here that either never post images or seldom do so. I suspect that others who post images often feel that those people lack a certain of credibility as they don't demonstrate their knowledge through images.

There are many understandable reasons not to post images on here. Nor should one have to post images on here to prove anything. As I previously mentioned, I rarely post images on here. However, I have included a link to my website in my signature for those that want to view my work.