"Fine Art Photography" and David Vestal

Renato Tonelli · Feb 20, 2008

In the March/April issue of Photo Techniques, David Vestal states that there is "No need to add 'fine art' in front of photographer" and goes on to make a case for it. I did not need any convincing: I have always been uneasy about the label. When a photographer introduces himself as "a fine art photographer", I don't criticize or ostracize him/her for it but I am always tempted to ask "what does that mean?", even though I know what the reference might be.
Do you feel that photographers calling themselves "fine art photographers" is pretentious?

dmcmahon · Feb 20, 2008

No more than a photographer who says he is an advertising, or commercial, or portrait or wedding photographer. Like a lot of things in life there are many degrees and nuances. By using the description 'fine art' I believe it just helps define the particular genre. I usually say landscape photographer and leave it at that. Sometimes I add black and white.
Happy birthday AA

Kerik · Feb 20, 2008

I find when I tell people I'm a fine art photographer they are less likely to ask me to photograph their niece's wedding or their son's 5th birthday party.

jp80874 · Feb 20, 2008

Kerik said:
I find when I tell people I'm a fine art photographer they are less likely to ask me to photograph their niece's wedding or their son's 5th birthday party.

Yes Kerik,
It is all about who is on the other side of the conversation. I have given up trying to explain why an old man carries a 7x17 and a wooden tripod around in a baby jogger. My wife makes enthusiastic attempts, mentioning Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, dark cloths, view cameras, etc., but I see that as an insult to AA and EW. I will never be there.

The person with a cigarette pack sized digital in his pocket wouldn't see what is there on the contact print. I have given up trying to explain the advantages of a large sheet of film and just go about my thing making pictures. I find they talk to my dog then and everyone is happy, especially the dog.

John Powers

arigram · Feb 20, 2008

The title of "fine art" or "artist" may be heavy, but there has to be a difference between the common cheap camera user that will take cheap snapshots of everything with no regard to quality and the skilled photographer who cares about aesthetics and art. Considering how low is the opinion of the general public in regards to photographers because of that attitude of cheapness, a small addition to the business card may sound pretentious but could be a matter of survival.
Personally I just state plain "photographer", but when my photos can't speak for themselves I need to do some 'splainin'.

David A. Goldfarb · Feb 20, 2008

"Fine art" is for display only.

"Applied art" is art for some other purpose, like illustration, advertising, reporting the news, documentation, etc.

It's that simple.

"Fine art" doesn't mean "art" or "great art" or even "good art." It's just art that serves no practical purpose other than to be seen. By the same token, it doesn't mean that "applied art" can't be great art.

Ed Sukach · Feb 20, 2008

I hate being pretentious.

If asked, I'll usually say, "I DO photography", (and here I'll confess to having learned this response from one of the most respected, "shining lights" of the art).
More often than not, the the next question will be "What kind of photography do you do?" My honest answer really indicates my direction; "Fine Art", not meant as any kind of qualification ... that is what I try to do... the determination of my degree of success ... whether my work is "fine" or not I'll leave for the great crowd out there to judge.
What IS "Fine Art"? Tough to describe. The best definition I can think of is "That which one would expect to experience in and exhibition labeled `Fine Art', or within the covers of a book so titled."

What that is ... requires some study.

.

Nigel · Feb 20, 2008

Renato Tonelli said:
Do you feel that photographers calling themselves "fine art photographers" is pretentious?

Perhaps a bit pretentious. That is why I practice coarse art photography...

clay · Feb 20, 2008

Fine Turnip Photographer. No one ever asks me to do a wedding or a birthday party.

jovo · Feb 20, 2008

After a discussion on this topic in an earlier thread, I changed my card to just my personal info, and "Photographs". If it were to say "photographer", I would certainly expect people to assume I'd point my camera wherever I were asked or paid to point it. By "photographs" I hope it will be assumed that it is I who chose the subjects and that the "product" is already made.

Shmoo · Feb 20, 2008

clay said:
Fine Turnip Photographer. No one ever asks me to do a wedding or a birthday party.

You have a well "rooted" sense of self!

David Brown · Feb 20, 2008

Kerik said:
... they are less likely to ask me to photograph their niece's wedding or their son's 5th birthday party.

"Just say 'No'."

Kerik · Feb 20, 2008

jovo said:
After a discussion on this topic in an earlier thread, I changed my card to just my personal info, and "Photographs". If it were to say "photographer", I would certainly expect people to assume I'd point my camera wherever I were asked or paid to point it. By "photographs" I hope it will be assumed that it is I who chose the subjects and that the "product" is already made.

But John, how do they know if "photographs" is a noun or a verb?

Kerik · Feb 20, 2008

David - It's more like "NO F-ING WAY!"

MattKing · Feb 20, 2008

I want to be there when Kerik shows up at the 5 year old's party with his wet plate collodion equipment.

Do you think people would understand?

Matt

Kerik · Feb 20, 2008

"Hey kid, take a whiff of THIS!"

jovo · Feb 20, 2008

Kerik said:
But John, how do they know if "photographs" is a noun or a verb?

hehe.....

Robert Brummitt · Feb 20, 2008

I always explain to folks that I'm a photographer. I photograph nature, a figure or what ever catches my eye or the light and my interest. But, I also promote fine art photography. It's a different level of photography. I'll always believe so. Ansel was a commercial photographer but he's remembered for his landscapes. Which in my term of understanding is fine art. They're sold in galleries, auction houses and held in museum collections. These are businesses of fine art.
Once, my uncle threw his 35mm camera on my lap during his daughter's wedding, he wanted me to be a second photographer, I wanted to enjoy the ceremony, so, I photographed the the trees, the cactus, the plants and the church. I handed the camera back and said "I'm a fine art photographer. Not a wedding photographer. Whole different way of seeing and understanding the art of photography"
I wonder if he ever got any nice prints from that roll? The marriage lasted 8 months.

Monophoto · Feb 20, 2008

Renato Tonelli said:
David Vestal states that there is "No need to add 'fine art' in front of photographer" and goes on to make a case for it.- - -
Do you feel that photographers calling themselves "fine art photographers" is pretentious?

The term "pretentious" doesn't belong in a sentence with the name David Vestal.

MurrayMinchin · Feb 20, 2008

Forensic photographer? Nope. Passport photo photographer? Nope. Wedding photographer? Nope. High school yearbook photographer? Nope. Smut/porn photographer? Nope. Fine art photographer? Yup

Murray

Chuck_P · Feb 20, 2008

When asked what type of photography I do or am doing, I just say "my intention is to make black and white fine art photographs".

Michel Hardy-Vallée · Feb 20, 2008

jovo said:
After a discussion on this topic in an earlier thread, I changed my card to just my personal info, and "Photographs". If it were to say "photographer", I would certainly expect people to assume I'd point my camera wherever I were asked or paid to point it. By "photographs" I hope it will be assumed that it is I who chose the subjects and that the "product" is already made.

Clever... I'll take note of that if I ever make biz cards.

jimgalli · Feb 20, 2008

First, I would have to care whether someone else thought I was pretentious. I don't.

Alex Bishop-Thorpe · Feb 20, 2008

I'm sure there are terribly pretentious baby photographers too, so I think it's a trait of a person more than of a field. Fine Art is just another field of photography, made for hanging on walls and looking pretty. I think you can be just as pretentious by trying to avoid these titles; "Image Maker" always came off a bit snobby sounding to me, but if they're good at what they do who cares?

Personally I stick to "Duck Photographer".

David A. Goldfarb · Feb 20, 2008

Personally, I get worried when someone (without a formal qualification as such) refers to him or herself as a "master."

"Fine Art Photography" and David Vestal

Renato Tonelli

dmcmahon

Kerik

jp80874

arigram

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

Ed Sukach

Nigel

clay

jovo

Membership Council

Shmoo

David Brown

Kerik

Kerik

MattKing

Moderator

Kerik

jovo

Membership Council

Robert Brummitt

Monophoto

MurrayMinchin

Membership Council

Chuck_P

Michel Hardy-Vallée

Membership Council

jimgalli

Alex Bishop-Thorpe

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

"Fine Art Photography" and David Vestal

Moderator

Membership Council

Moderator

Membership Council

Membership Council

Membership Council

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency