Same could be said for the other graphics arts. But if profligacy and prolificness was to be the negative arbiters of whether something is art or not, especially high or fine art, that leaves art as a very easily hollowed out concept.Photography came to be considered a serious art form as a purely monochromatic medium. In a sense, it gained its highest level of respectability as that - with people like Stieglitz, Adams, Strand, Weston. Also in a sense, it is not really a respectable art form any more. It's a spray of vomit you see in every conceivable direction for every conceivable use.
Case in point, some years ago, I had an Ansel Adams calendar pinned to my cube wall at work, a colleague stopped by, looks at the photo for a bit, and says “nice picture, too bad it’s not in color”
But if profligacy and prolificness was to be the negative arbiters of whether something is art or not, especially high or fine art, that leaves art as a very easily hollowed out concept.
It has to be more than that, and more resilient than that to be a real concept.
I have no axe to grind, and I really don't give a damn about sensors.I’m offering reasons and explanations to the original question, and the subsequent answers.
If you have an axe to grind, go to PMs and I’ll decide if you are worth ignoring or not.
Apart from him being an arse, he might as well have extended it to “why would anyone pay for a photo?”.After a business meeting, one of the guys from my customers’ team looked at my laptop screen and saw the “wallpaper”. It’s a photo I took of a train leaving a station, in black and white. He asked something about the photo and I mentioned I had taken it myself, that photography was one of my hobbies, and that I would like to sell prints of these photos so it wasn’t a hobby anymore. And he closed the conversation with: “but who would pay for a photo like this? It’s black and white!”
The “anyone can do it” argument has always been strong.
Also in a sense, it is not really a respectable art form any more. It's a spray of vomit you see in every conceivable direction for every conceivable use.
oh no, I am not implying that XD I'm just saying that I am most used seeing professional photographers using black and white, not that it is superior, I was just asking why that happens, so please do not misunderstand my words, the last thing I want to do is causing an argument about wich one is better, I think both are bretty beautifuul when used correctly.
Also in a sense, it is not really a respectable art form any more.
interesting that in Portugal most professional photographers use b/w ...
when was it exactly that photography was a respectable art form?
I'll have to agree to disagree with you about photography being "art"
but the beauty of it is that someone made it and thinks its NOT boring at al
Same goes for any art. And really this has always been so. But has been especially accented by the availability of mechanisms to generate something that has the superficial sheen to the naive peasant of being higher art, in recent decades.And now, with photography, it's even stronger. Magazines and newspapers routinely use phone pictures. Most things a photographer used to be hired to do are now done using a cell phone or a digital camera set on auto. The photo studio in everyone's hand has made everyone suddenly an authority on what is and is not good photography.
I think someone up above said it's mostly photographers that might think b&w is "higher" art than colour. I'd agree with that. But I'll also stick by the argument that, for most people, almost no photo is art.
Nice try to toss out some jargon, but I really don't think it applies here.Same goes for any art. And really this has always been so. But has been especially accented by the availability of mechanisms to generate something that has the superficial sheen to the naive peasant of being higher art, in recent decades.
In a way art is the ultimate Dunning-Kruger test.
Same goes for any art. And really this has always been so. But has been especially accented by the availability of mechanisms to generate something that has the superficial sheen to the naive peasant of being higher art, in recent decades.
In a way art is the ultimate Dunning-Kruger test.
That's art.
I find the case with art is that too many people overestimate how special it is to create art. Artistic expression is a normal human mode of expression. Finding an artistic piece very valuable or culturally important is a rarity. But art itself is not as rare and rarefied as people seem to think.
Jargon‽ You mean term of the year 2020?Nice try to toss out some jargon, but I really don't think it applies here.
There is a hierarchy and taxonomy of art. High and low. And applied arts and fluxus and highly symbolic art, are four axis end extremes (though not necessarily mutually exclusive).I find the case with art is that too many people overestimate how special it is to create art. Artistic expression is a normal human mode of expression. Finding an artistic piece very valuable or culturally important is a rarity. But art itself is not as rare and rarefied as people seem to think.
There is a hierarchy and taxonomy of art. High and low. And applied arts and fluxus and highly symbolic art, are four axis end extremes (though not necessarily mutually exclusive).
Same with the matter of applied and used resources. From the haiku that changed the world to a palace of gold and ivory.
And that’s just the barest of an outline of an epistemology of art.
Jargon‽ You mean term of the year 2020?
naah that’s got nothing to do with art. It just means the person who made it didn’t delete or take the snapshot off of the fridge
If that has nothing to do with art, then you'll need to explain what art is - why is it that someone's Instagram photo is not art and a painting in a museum is? You need to do that without introducing a notion of value. Value applies to an identity - you've not yet established that identity.
But who cares, anyway? No one is actually interested in a real idea. People are truly only interested in maintaining some ephemeral mystery - the religion of art.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?