You may be a photographer but are you an artist?

[Javert]

Do any of these questions matter? From an article at Lomography on the same blog:
1. Do you think about why some photos stay in the mind?
2. Are you willing to redefine your world?
3. Are you aware of visual relationships, including minute details?
4. Do you make photos that cannot be repeated?
5. Do you look within yourself for the benefit of your photography?
6. Do you push beyond the limits and confines of the mind?
7. Are you willing to face your fears?



Regards, Art

Mr Ballen is a great photographer and artist, but this is just pompous bs typical of many American men of his generation.

 

[markbau]

A useful perspective here:

I stopped the video at "Fine art is a marketplace" America, everything is about the holy dollar.

 

[removed account4]

A useful perspective here:

Thanks for that! For years the line between art and commerce has been blurred, so many commerical shooters now selling their work as "fine art photography" begs the question whats the difference between a commercial image and a fine art image seeing they are both being rented or sold as commerce. Uncle Ansel's friends called him a sell out ( or so the speaker says ) because he sold his work for what it was worth.

Another perspective might be :

I stopped the video at "Fine art is a marketplace" America, everything is about the holy dollar.

Isn't that how success in America ( and other places ) is judged ?
How can one be a "successful artist" while they are alive if they are completely ignored and unknown and die penniless? The old "starving artist" thing really isn't all its cracked up to be.

 

[markbau]

[QUOTE="
Isn't that how success in America ( and other places ) is judged ?
How can one be a "successful artist" while they are alive if they are completely ignored and unknown and die penniless? The old "starving artist" thing really isn't all its cracked up to be.[/QUOTE]

It all gets back to the question of "Does it matter how others judge you?" If you want to make money out of your "art" you are commercial, you are producing work for an audience and a market. Nothing wrong with that of course. But it needs to be stated that 0.0001% of people make money from their "art" For every Ansel Adams and Michael Kenna's there are 1000's of people that produce work for their own pleasure, that don't care if it sells or even if other people like their work. Success, IMHO, is not achieved by how many prints you sell or how much money you make. To many people, success is actually how many people validate their work. If you need that validation, fine, but some people don't need to have others validate their work. A true craftsperson knows if what they have produced is any good and don't need the applause of others. I was once married to a painter who thought she was the greatest undiscovered "artist" ever. She ruined her life trying to become a famous artist, instead of getting a real job she persisted with the delusion that one day people would recognise her for the great artist that she thought he was and would be able to live off the profits of her great art. Reality has a way of getting in the way of dreams. I drive trains, I take photos and print them. A few, a very few, of my photos are decent, that's enough for me.

 

[jim10219]

...Isn't that how success in America ( and other places ) is judged ?
How can one be a "successful artist" while they are alive if they are completely ignored and unknown and die penniless? The old "starving artist" thing really isn't all its cracked up to be.

Would you consider Vincent Van Gogh, Franz Kafka, Johann Sebastian Bach, Henry David Thoreau, and Johannes Vermeer successful? What about Emily Dickenson, Sylvia Plath, Edgar Allen Poe, Herman Melville, Paul Gaugin, and Claude Monet?

 

[removed account4]

Would you consider Vincent Van Gogh, Franz Kafka, Johann Sebastian Bach, Henry David Thoreau, and Johannes Vermeer successful? What about Emily Dickenson, Sylvia Plath, Edgar Allen Poe, Herman Melville, Paul Gaugin, and Claude Monet?

Hi jim10219

Yes, I would but it is currently 2019. Were they considered "successful" when they were making their artworks? It seems the point of the video is for one to successfully market and sell their "fine art photography" . I guess it all depends on what success means.

Would you consider someone who struggled all their life and died penniless and in debt a success ?

 

[Luckless]

Hi jim10219
Would you consider someone who struggled all their life and died penniless and in debt a success ?

Yes, but as a sarcastic pessimist I've found that setting a very low bar of expectations makes for a happier and less disappointing life... So my views may be a tad biased...

 

[Ariston]

I think I am the best artist since Joshua Lancington.

 

[KenS]

I think I am the best artist since Joshua Lancington.

"Self Praise", it is said.. is no honour

Grumpy

 

[Ariston]

"Self Praise", it is said.. is no honour

Grumpy

You only say that because you have never seen Joshua Lancington's work.

 

[Ariston]

"Self Praise", it is said.. is no honour

Grumpy

Ken, I am just having fun with the title of the thread. As you said, self-praise is weird. That's why there is only one answer you can give to a question like, "Are you an artist?" If you say yes, you are full of yourself (or full of something else!), so you have to say no.

I am no artist when it comes to photography. I just thought the question was funny.

 

[MattKing]

Ken, I am just having fun with the title of the thread. As you said, self-praise is weird. That's why there is only one answer you can give to a question like, "Are you an artist?" If you say yes, you are full of yourself (or full of something else!), so you have to say no.

I am no artist when it comes to photography. I just thought the question was funny.

I'm going to disagree, because I think everyone creates, and there is at least tiny amounts of art in everyone's creations.
To my mind, the argument is about the quality and quantity of the art, not its existence.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

If you express yourself through a particular medium, you are an artist.

 

[faberryman]

Answering the question "Are you an artist?" isn't all that important. The real question is whether you work is any good. I would worry about doing good work, and not worry about the rest. Being considered an artist who does lousy work isn't all that edifying.

 

[Ariston]

Answering the question "Are you an artist?" isn't all that important. The real question is whether you work is any good.

"Good" is about as subjective a term as there is. I've seen a lot of "art" that I don't care for. I try to create things that I enjoy, or that my family enjoys. But I don't do it for money, so I have that luxury.

Also (and I've made this analogy before) I really just enjoy the process - especially with film. It is all cathartic for me... Like when I used to ride my Harley. It wasn't about the destination at all.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Ken, I am just having fun with the title of the thread. As you said, self-praise is weird. That's why there is only one answer you can give to a question like, "Are you an artist?" If you say yes, you are full of yourself (or full of something else!), so you have to say no.

I am no artist when it comes to photography. I just thought the question was funny.

Not all my photographs are artistic, just some carefully composed are.

 

[Vaughn]

Even if one's art isn't considered good, that does not mean one can not or will not get better at making art. But how will one get better at making art if one does not consider one to be an artist?

Artistic success can be personal and/or monetarily. I might have been more finacially successful if I did not consider being a stay-at-home-dad to our triplet boys for 18 years to be highly personally rewarding...but it has helped me to be a personal and artistic success -- in my own mind, anyway.

Art is a journey -- good point Ariston. Also excellent points by faberryman and Andrew.

If I don't answer the question, "Yes" and call myself an artist, how can I justify to myself being represented by an art gallery?

 

[jim10219]

Hi jim10219

Yes, I would but it is currently 2019. Were they considered "successful" when they were making their artworks? It seems the point of the video is for one to successfully market and sell their "fine art photography" . I guess it all depends on what success means.

Would you consider someone who struggled all their life and died penniless and in debt a success ?

I see what you're getting at. And you are absolutely correct, in that it all depends on what success means. To me, money doesn't equate success.

Take for instance, Thomas Kinkade. He's a joke in the art world. No critic worth their salt finds his work compelling. No respectful museum is interested in showing his work. He literally had to open up his own museum to get his work into one. But he did sell a ton of work and made himself into a household name. Would I consider him successful? Some people might, and he definitely achieved wealth and fame. But I can't. His art is an eyesore. I view his body of work as the product of a pyramid scheme, preying on the average person, promising them the hope of a rapidly appreciating art investment, but delivering nothing more than a faded dream.

 

[faberryman]

Even if one's art isn't considered good, that does not mean one can not or will not get better at making art. But how will one get better at making art if one does not consider one to be an artist?

By eschewing the labels and focusing on the work.

 

[KenS]

Not all my photographs are artistic, just some carefully composed are.

 

[Vaughn]

By eschewing the labels and focusing on the work.

Point taken, but that is what an artist does...

 

[Ariston]

Who says what is good or bad? This is totally subjective. I have met plenty of real-life art "coinnisseurs" who would consider a house painter's drop cloth art if you framed it and put it in a museum. And these people are remarkably similar to "art critics".

Thomas Kinkade is not my favorite, but I can count on one hand how many artists I consider to be as instantly recognizable as him. He has his own definite style. And he is enjoyed by many.

The money from a buyer's wallet is the only truly honest critic.

This is why disciplines are separated into Arts and Sciences, by the way. But some people are pretentious enough to think that what they consider to be good art is the final word on the subject.

 

[faberryman]

Who says what is good or bad? This is totally subjective.

I don't think that is the case. I believe in neither moral relativism nor aesthetic relativism.

 

[Ariston]

I don't think that is the case. I believe in neither moral relativism nor aesthetic relativism.

Subjectivity and relativism are not the same thing.

 

[alanrockwood]

Isn't it true that most of the great artists of the past were what we would today call commercial artists, or in other words, someone paid them to make their art?