What is your definition of photography ?

[removed account4]

no, this isn't intended to be one of those lame / pathetic threads started to stir some sort of imaginary pot
pinning people who like using film and analog processes against people who have other tools in their kit ..

what exactly is your definition of photography?

mine is broad and open ..
to me it is just about light sensitive media, or no media at all.
it is about a shadow on a wall, or impression something leaves on a painted or unpainted surface after the sun bleaches everything around it, its about using a device, any sort it doesn't matter to me with a lens or without, with photo emulsion that is fixed or stained in a camera or out of a camera, with a sensor or without, and its about using light sensitive materials that react with uv light that might create some sort of image or design ...

what's your definition ?
please be respectful of others and don't be belligerent or chest thumpy about what you believe in or not. seeing photography has been around in one form or another, for a little over 200 years we should hopefully be able to have a conversation about it ?

 

[ChristopherCoy]

If you'd have asked me that 6 weeks ago, I would have probably answered with a cliché.

Today I think I want to say something along the lines of: "a method of visually conveying and communicating thoughts and emotions." I'm just not sure that is a complete answer yet.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Recording light, with camera or without.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

I tried coming up with a minimal definition once when I was teaching a class, and it went something like this:

Photography is defined by the conjunction of the following three elements:

1. A chemical or physical reaction caused by light in a proportional manner
2. A stencil, which is a way to control spatially the flow of light on a given area, exploiting the principle of proportionality in the chemical reaction
3. A way to render the results of this reaction cognitively accessible

So I excluded shadows on a wall, as well as the image of a camera obscura (they have #1 and #2, but not #3), but I included sun tattoos.

Fixation, in my opinion, matters a lot in the definition of photography (hence my signature...). Now, you have to bear in mind that that this kind of definition also reflects a certain history. The concept of "photography" happened at some point in time in the early 19th century, but some objects before that could fit the definition as well (e.g. sun tattoos) but they were not recognized as such and linked to this specific concept. Likewise, new objects that emerge may fit the criteria, but provoke debate (remember the whole "digital is not photo" thing?).

Regardless of the definition, photography is not an abstract essence. It's a human practice from which we can abstract a number of significant characteristics that constitute a definition we can use when we need to draw the line between photo and not-photo for whatever reason (legal? artistic? other?).

In other words, defining photography involves making all sorts of relative propositions: you define photography for a given purpose, based on available evidence, for a specific audience, at a particular time, and so forth. Doesn't mean that all definitions are bad, au contraire, but one thing they tend NOT to be is eternal! Nor are they absolute.

My definition was tailored to a class on the history of photography, mainly attended by BFA students. I wanted to give them something generic enough that it could stimulate their creativity, while also giving them the ability to distinguish photo from other media—thus giving them a wall to tear down...

 

[Tom Kershaw]

For myself photography is something involving a lens of some description, using light sensitive materials or sensor.

 

[BrianShaw]

Recording light, with camera or without.

Yes, our eyes do that too... hence “photographic memory”!

 

[eddie]

Recording light, with camera or without.

Sounds good to me.

 

[Auer]

The less defined Photography is, the better off we all are

 

[nmp]

I won't try to define it, but I know when I see it.

 

[Vaughn]

Drawing with light. Way too broad, granted, and not too original, either.

 

[Cholentpot]

Capturing a scene in time with some sort of device.

 

[urnem57]

A chemical reaction.

 

[Michael Firstlight]

Life, captured in light and time.

MFL

 

[eddie]

Microcontrast, 3D pop, dynamic range and - most importantly - sharpness!

Funny, coming from a guy who lists himself as a plastic camera shooter.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

no, this isn't intended to be one of those lame / pathetic threads started to stir some sort of imaginary pot
pinning people who like using film and analog processes against people who have other tools in their kit ..

what exactly is your definition of photography?

mine is broad and open ..
to me it is just about light sensitive media, or no media at all.
it is about a shadow on a wall, or impression something leaves on a painted or unpainted surface after the sun bleaches everything around it, its about using a device, any sort it doesn't matter to me with a lens or without, with photo emulsion that is fixed or stained in a camera or out of a camera, with a sensor or without, and its about using light sensitive materials that react with uv light that might create some sort of image or design ...

what's your definition ?
please be respectful of others and don't be belligerent or chest thumpy about what you believe in or not. seeing photography has been around in one form or another, for a little over 200 years we should hopefully be able to have a conversation about it ?

Painting with light onto whatever light sensitive medium.

 

[MattKing]

Microcontrast, 3D pop, dynamic range and - most importantly - sharpness!

A truly bourgeois concept!
Which certainly brings rise to thoughts of Le Charme discret de la bourgeoisie.
With kudos to Bresson, and Luis Buñuel - one French, and one Spanish, and both really important to any definition you might consider for photography (my definition includes the moving kind).

 

[markjwyatt]

Gathering reflected or transmitted light, forming an image with it through some form of optical regulation, then capturing the image in a sort of permanent way (i.e., no picture is truly permanent).

 

[radiant]

Drawing with light. Way too broad, granted, and not too original, either.

I like this definition. I don't think it should be anything else than that.

 

[guangong]

In order to separate from other methods such as drawing, painting and sculpture, the use of a camera and film. Digital capture is another alternative method.

 

[radiant]

In order to separate from other methods such as drawing, painting and sculpture, the use of a camera and film. Digital capture is another alternative method.

Maybe the big question is why do you want to separate film or digital capture?

 

[BrianShaw]

Yawn. Here we go again

again

again

...

 

[removed account4]

In order to separate from other methods such as drawing, painting and sculpture, the use of a camera and film. Digital capture is another alternative method.

Sounds good, and true they might be different but they might be similar in some respects...
can you provide a definition of what photography means to you? fhanks.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

can you provide a definition of what photography means to you?

Seeing and reseeing. And being restless in-between.

 

[Vaughn]

There is camera-less, lens-less, and film-less photography. Photograms, pinhole cameras, and all those sorts of things.

And I like the definition directly above.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

And I like the definition directly above.

I see what you did there.