Are you an hobbyist or artist?

[Poohblah]

Similar subjects have been discussed under the guise of "What is art?" or "What constitutes a photograph vs. a picture?" and it seems that many responses are superficial, improvised attempts to make the speaker appear superior to the masses of photographers. But I am wondering about your approach, and how you think of yourself in relationship to the camera and the photograph. Are you a businessman or a professional who depends on the camera as the fisherman depends on his tackle? Are you a photojournalist who tells stories? Are you an artist sharing your own story? Or are you a hobbyist who simply enjoys playing with cameras? And, of course, these categories are neither mutually exclusive nor exhaustive.

I would like to hear your thoughts. In high school I was the hobbyist playing with lenses in the light and paper in the dark. Now the image is my hobby. I am not so vain to think myself an artist; perhaps one day I will be, but for now my aspirations lie in the realm of composition and exposure, not content or meaning.

And I am not attempting to place a value judgment on being an artist. Quite the opposite, in fact. Sometimes I feel that the discussions in photography forums reduce the spectrum of photographs to "art or not" when in fact photographs can be something else entirely.

 

[keithwms]

I make photographs simply to express my appreciation for what I see and experience. Sometimes somebody wants a print for free, sometimes to buy, but mostly I do it for my own enjoyment. No expectation of revenue or recognition, though I do show stuff in various places to provide a sort of visual journal of what I am up to. To me, helping others get as much enjoyment out of photography as I get is the best payment of all. In my heart of hearts I am a teacher and a student.

 

[Brian Legge]

I'm not an artist. I'm a guy who takes pictures and likes cameras. I guess I think of myself as more of a technician than artist. I'm happy when I can take photos like these but I don't feel any constitute 'art'. They lack intent, cohesion, etc:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/4437036171/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/4635441553/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/4593369381/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/4590765373/in/set-72157616410312242/

 

[flatulent1]

I am strictly a hobbyist, nothing more. Just a happy shooter!

 

[alanrockwood]

I would say I am more of a hacker than anything else, but if I had to pick one or the other, artist or hobbyist, I would have to say hobbyist.

 

[5stringdeath]

Sure

 

[Vaughn]

When people would ask me if photography was a hobby or if I was a professional, I would answer that photography was my passion. That always seem to satisfy their curiosity. Now I say that I am a professional artist.

 

[Brian Legge]

I like the passion response. I think I'll use that in the future.

The implication that I don't like about 'hobbyist' is that you aren't serious about your work, the quality of it, artistic elements, etc.

I view hobbyist and professional as antonyms, not artist and hobbyist. The hobbyist/professional distinction is about livelihood, not about quality of work.

 

[Perry Way]

Well, I have mastered other art forms and accumulated some other art forms I haven't mastered along the way.. and in reality I'm a paid technical artist as my day job is computer software development. Even though I haven't sold any print as a professional, I am sure as heck an artist! I was born an artist! Someone mentioned being a hacker. Well, hacking is a process of discovery. It doesn't preclude one from being an artist. Do you think that Renoire or Monet or Matisse or the like didn't hack?
Impressionism was all about hacking in its early days! (now it is learned the "proper" way through instruction) And now it is sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars, some millions of dollars and nobody disputes that it is art or that it was created by an artist.

And I think anyone who spends a deal of time pursuing their passions which are creative in nature, that person has every right to verbally announce they are an artist without any doubt or hesitation!

 

[Poohblah]

I view hobbyist and professional as antonyms, not artist and hobbyist. The hobbyist/professional distinction is about livelihood, not about quality of work.

Right. "Hobbyist and artist" is not supposed to be a dichotomy. Perhaps I haven't made that clear.

I do appreciate your responses. I am tired of hearing one-or-the-other discussions.

 

[Marc Leest]

A hobbyist looks for sharpness
A pro looks for assignments
An artist looks for light

-m-

 

[Vaughn]

A hobbyist looks for sharpness

...or bokeh (or however it is spelled)

It was when I realized that I was looking for light that I started to realize that photography was a passion and that art was what I was immersed in.

 

[dng88]

Hobbyist but more want to learn to appreciate ...

 

[alexmacphee]

The implication that I don't like about 'hobbyist' is that you aren't serious about your work, the quality of it, artistic elements, etc.

The way I see the distinction is in terms of audience : the hobbyist having only himself as his audience, doing what pleases him, and the artist having other people as his audience, to please or intrigue them.

 

[perkeleellinen]

This could become a really interesting discussion; I like hearing about what motivates and drives others.

When people ask me what I do this for, I normally explain that I can't draw and photography started as a way to get out some artistic urges that couldn't be expressed via other routes. Now that sounds like I should be an 'artist' but I've never sold a print and have absolutely no interest in going down any commercial or artistic routes where I sell my work (my audience extends no further than family, friends and people on my postcard list). So maybe I'm a hobbyist, but I have no interest in gear in itself. Maybe, then, I can say I'm a hobbyist that makes 'art', hope that doesn't sound vain.

 

[benjiboy]

I'm a hobbyist, I have been for more than fifty years, I don't believe photography is an art but a craft, and I abhor the "self styled" photographic artists.

 

[Dan Henderson]

I'm a hobbyist, I have been for more than fifty years, I don't believe photography is an art but a craft, and I abhor the "self styled" photographic artists.

Perhaps photography is nothing more than the exercise of craftmanship for you, but I use the craft that I have developed in an attempt to express myself through art. I like what Bayles and Orland wrote in Art and Fear that "art is the visible edge of craft."

 

[RPippin]

My answer when asked is, I don't have hobbies, I have obsessions. Photography for me is an obsession, the whole ensalada. Cameras, film, darkroom, everything about it. Artist? The hell if I know. I'll leave that to someone else to figure out. Serious best describes it for me. Yeah, obsessed and serious or hobby or artist. I'd go for the obsessed and serious.

 

[benjiboy]

Perhaps photography is nothing more than the exercise of craftmanship for you, but I use the craft that I have developed in an attempt to express myself through art. I like what Bayles and Orland wrote in Art and Fear that "art is the visible edge of craft."

My point is Dan that it's not you the individual to call yourself an "Artist " but what the rest of the World considers you.

 

[bsdunek]

IMHO - photography is the medium, craftsmanship is when you do it well. Art is when you are expressive. For years I strived to be a good craftsman - everything sharp, clean, good contrast, fine grain, all the 'good stuff'. Now I find that developing that craftsmanship allows me to better express myself. When I want to create a photo I can control all those mechanical things to achieve my vision. That's when it crosses over from craftsmanship to art.
As I say, just IMHO.

 

[floradeborah]

I always shoot what has a meaning to me, it's usually pre calculated images that appeal me. I believe in photography as a medium of expression that suit me better than words. And lately when I get asked about "so what do you do?" and I answer "I'm a photographer", I feel like this is not the right answer for me. I'm sometimes afraid to say "I'm an artist and use photography to express how i feel". Hopefully I will be soon more self confident and satisfied with my personal body of work so that I will be able to to say it later on : )

 

[JDP]

I would say I am 'part artist'. I have an artistic side, but my training and profession is scientific. What interests me in photography is that it satisfies both areas. It melds art and science into one.

 

[urbanvelocity]

IMHO - photography is the medium, craftsmanship is when you do it well. Art is when you are expressive. For years I strived to be a good craftsman - everything sharp, clean, good contrast, fine grain, all the 'good stuff'. Now I find that developing that craftsmanship allows me to better express myself. When I want to create a photo I can control all those mechanical things to achieve my vision. That's when it crosses over from craftsmanship to art.
As I say, just IMHO.

Bruce it is the same as learning paint and brush, craft and technique are where they all start. Seeing the light, it allows you to better express your vision.

Photography is something I do for the joy of it. It is how the creative in me manifests. I have never considered it a hobby as I am not really sure what a hobby is. Am I an artist? I do not claim that label either, I am not sure why but it has never been one I have considered for myself. I love making photographs, I equally love learning new techniques and processes to better express the way I see.

 

[Andrew Moxom]

To me it can be art, or hobby.... I'd like to be able to do both, but realize that I shouldn't quit my day job to be the artist as I'd be broke! For me the whole point of taking pictures is to share a visual experience that you had, and the emotions it gave you, and convey them through the print or whatever medium in a way that moves you for others to share. It's a creative outlet and the urge to create something tangible. Some are compelled to capture slices of time, others light, others sharpness, and others the process is the reason they do it. it's all relative to an 'emotion', 'experience', 'event', 'passion', or 'composition'. Some get paid for it, some don't, some don't care.

Do what's true to your vision, and you will be successful regardless of whether hobby, or artist is your goal. Trying to make a living off of it is different kettle of fish and pure hobby and artistry alone won't take you through the business relationships that need to be a major part of taking your work to the next level for exposure, selling, notoriety etc.

 

[Joe Lipka]

I start by calling myself a photographer. The appellation artist is bestowed upon you by others. In truth, I am an amateur, one who pursues because of affection for the medium and a desire to tell a story about what I see in my life.