What Makes it art, when it simply could be a snapshot?

[markbarendt]

I wasn't talking about professionalism.

Let me make the question more clear for you JS MD.

Does there have to be commerce involved for you to consider a photo "art"?

 

[removed account4]

So you are saying that 50% of the amateur photographers on apug are not talented?

How did you arrive at this sweeping (backhanded compliment) generalization?

the same way s/he suggests that no one's opinions are valid unless
they are a professional ...

maybe s/he should get a subscription to apug
and look through the gallery and see
for her/himself ....

 

[markbarendt]

:munch:

So you are saying that 50% of the amateur photographers on apug are not talented?

How did you arrive at this sweeping (backhanded compliment) generalization?

I almost asked that question.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!​

 

[michaelbsc]

So you are saying that 50% of the amateur photographers on apug are not talented?

Hell, I'm not talented, and I've got pictures to *PROVE* it.

But I sure have opinions coming out my ears, my mouth, and my wife claims other orifices too.

 

[Worker 11811]

Art makes us look at things in a way that we have not seen them before.

This can apply to painting/drawing, music or dance but I believe it especially applies to photography because when you make a photograph you are creating an image of some object or scene which exists in real life.

1,000 people could walk past a tree, for example, but never give it a second thought. It's just a tree. However, if you make a photograph of that tree, you can show the texture of the bark or show the sun streaming through the branches or you can show that tree in countless ways that most people would not have thought about before, even though they might walk by that tree every day on the way to work or school.

I remember a story about Picasso. Once, when he was asked the question, "What is art?" he picked up the grate from a gas stove, held it up on end and declared, "Behold! Venus of the Gas Ring!"

Sure, only somebody as famous as Picasso would have the sway to get away with such a trick but it does illustrate my point. Maybe he was making a commentary on industrial design. Maybe he had been drinking a little too much wine. (Probable! ) Maybe he was just being a wise ass but, in holding up that grate the way he did, he forced the other person to see an ordinary object in a way that he had not seen it before.

Photography and art, in general, can document. It can inform. It can tell a story. It can convey an emotion. It can create a mood. It can do a thousand things but, no matter what it does, it achieves that end by showing us something in a way that we have not seen before or, at least, brings our attention to a way of looking at it.

So... To the OP's question: They are well executed photographs but I wouldn't consider them anything more than simple documentary pictures or, to use the term, "Snapshots." They don't show me the scene in an interesting or different way. They don't tell a story unless you consider all of them as a whole but, even then, the story is merely documentary and doesn't convey any meaning beyond, "Some guy captured this image with a camera."

That's why I vote, "Snapshot."

 

[markbarendt]

Yeah, got that feeling too.

 

[Steve Smith]

There are, I am sure, bus drivers who are very talented and very capable in our craft.

There are bus drivers talented in many crafts.

I have a bus driver friend. She has a degree in English literature and plays classical music on bass clarinet.



Steve.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

But I sure have opinions coming out my ears, my mouth, and my wife claims other orifices too.

My God! We're married to the same woman??

:eek:

Ken

 

[markbarendt]

There are bus drivers talented in many crafts.

I have a bus driver friend. She has a degree in English literature and plays classical music on bass clarinet.



Steve.

Exactly my point Steve.

In my mind, regardless of the discipline and regardless of the product or service involved, the only thing that commercial success proves is that one is good at commerce.

 

[Steve Smith]

the only thing that commercial success proves is that one is good at commerce.

Agreed. You can be commercially successful at many crafts without being particularly good at it.

The same with qualifications. I have known degree educated people who don't have a clue about anything practical. I once worked with someone who had a degree in electronics. He asked me which way round an LED should be connected. After staring at him in disbelief for a while, I suggested that he should work it out for himself.


Steve.

 

[hoffy]

Agreed. You can be commercially successful at many crafts without being particularly good at it.

The same with qualifications. I have known degree educated people who don't have a clue about anything practical. I once worked with someone who had a degree in electronics. He asked me which way round an LED should be connected. After staring at him in disbelief for a while, I suggested that he should work it out for himself.


Steve.

That is Oh so true Steve. The best engineers are those who have gotten a trade first in their youth. I have worked in the metal trades (I worked as a fitter/machinist for the first 10 years of my working life) and it was quite obvious when something was designed by a wet behind the ears from high school to uni to work engineer.....

Anyhow, I see the "I am a Professional, I am right" attitude has popped up again. My question was answered a month ago, but some people can't seem to help themselves. While I have accepted that the imagery can be viewed as art, this is my own personal opinion. Others don't share that and more power to them, as they are just as entitled to an opinion as me, the bus driver or the janitor...or the pro (even if they are a pro janitor)

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have a feeling we are just feeding a troll. The writing certainly reads like one.

Ditto. I was exercising restraint by not saying so. That is why I stopped responding to his rants. If he keeps it up I will put him on my ignore list.

Steve

 

[removed account4]

the strange thing is
JS MD is neither a professional photographer
nor a art historian, but a doctor ( guessing from username )
but against her/his own argument, her/his opinions matter more than the rest of
the lay-people here on apug ?
and there are MFAs, art historians and working professional photographers
responding in this thread whose opinions are worthless ...

 

[philosomatographer]

I have to admit, that his did start my own questioning on what is art and what is a snapshot? While I actually enjoy Shore's work (I like images that you must explore and not simply just look at), I do see my wifes point.

Ah, the recurring "what makes a photograph art" thread - second only to the "Film vs. Digital" thread in it's persistence!

In my opinion, art is like Love - nobody universally agrees on a single definition. I must say, I am personally disgusted that such poorly composes snapshots are even listed on a site that uses the (pretentious) term "Fine Art". At most they might have some historical significance as being rather old colour photographs, depicting aspects of a society that has since changed. But that is true of most photographs depicting any human relics or activity, I think.

So - not to say that snapshots cannot be immensely interesting, but I really do feel that the "craft" bit needs to play a role in "art" (it is a "labour" of love, after all)...

It's all marketing and hype in my opinion. I'd be damn thrilled if somebody would sell my careless snapshots for lots of money though!

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

In my opinion, art is like Love - nobody universally agrees on a single definition.

You have my agreement to the fullest extent.

'You can't polish a turd', some say. Well, first you have to define what a turd is, and that's where we all disagree. Even the term 'photograph' is subjective, because we can't agree what constitutes a 'photograph' in terms of how it was captured, and what was done to it in processing before it's displayed (as a print or digital representation online). Now to try to agree on what's 'art' takes it to yet another level of subjective interpretation. To argue about what can be considered 'art' is futile, because there will never be a reply that we all agree upon.

This is why I simply call them 'pictures'. Nobody can argue with that, and it helps in focusing the topic of conversation on things like framing, gesture, light, color, texture, and so on, which are less subjective terms, and they fairly objectively describe the picture without getting into confusing nomenclature of how to label it.

 

[MaximusM3]

You have my agreement to the fullest extent.

'You can't polish a turd', some say. Well, first you have to define what a turd is, and that's where we all disagree. Even the term 'photograph' is subjective, because we can't agree what constitutes a 'photograph' in terms of how it was captured, and what was done to it in processing before it's displayed (as a print or digital representation online). Now to try to agree on what's 'art' takes it to yet another level of subjective interpretation. To argue about what can be considered 'art' is futile, because there will never be a reply that we all agree upon.

This is why I simply call them 'pictures'. Nobody can argue with that, and it helps in focusing the topic of conversation on things like framing, gesture, light, color, texture, and so on, which are less subjective terms, and they fairly objectively describe the picture without getting into confusing nomenclature of how to label it.

Exactly...which also gets me to the famous and highly philosophical proverb.."someone's crap is always someone else's treasure".

The key word is, as always, "SUBJECTIVE". If it was otherwise, why would there people out there paying thousands (or even millions) for what some of us would consider crap and wouldn't pay $1 for? Is it because we are not educated enough to know what we like and can't see the intrinsic value in something that we simply don't enjoy looking at? That's total BS.

 

[removed account4]

philosomatographer, thomas and max

that all sounds good,
but do you have the credentials
to back up your opinions ?

:munch:

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

philosomatographer, thomas and max

that all sounds good,
but do you have the credentials
to back up your opinions ?
it seems that we aren't allowed to have opinions

:munch:

None of what I said is an opinion. When I lay down the facts, listen up! For it is the law by which you will abide. Or the wrath of the Swedish trolls will spare no expense in tormenting you.

 

[MaximusM3]

None of what I said is an opinion. When I lay down the facts, listen up! For it is the law by which you will abide. Or the wrath of the Swedish trolls will spare no expense in tormenting you.

Yeah!!!!

 

[Sirius Glass]

philosomatographer, thomas and max

that all sounds good,
but do you have the credentials
to back up your opinions ?

:munch:

For whom does the bell troll? It trolls for thee!

 

[MaximusM3]

philosomatographer, thomas and max

that all sounds good,
but do you have the credentials
to back up your opinions ?

:munch:

Nope, sorry.

 

[Sirius Glass]

philosomatographer, thomas and max

that all sounds good,
but do you have the credentials
to back up your opinions ?

:munch:

I am not qualified to back up my opinions!

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I am not qualified to back up my opinions!

I'll remember that next time there's a discussion about the virtues of Xtol...

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'll remember that next time there's a discussion about the virtues of Xtol...

Sure if it flows your boat!