Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Photography...art?

Journal Entry: Thu Oct 9, 2008, 12:45 PM
It is a common belief that this photographic process is relatively new to the world of art. Seldom do people realize that from the fifteenth century on, artists were using optical devices to create their work. During the Rennaissance, the desire for realism and a close depiction of nature and its beauty enticed the Renaissance artists to use tools as well as pigments and brushes such as the 'camera obscura'. This device gave them the ability to reflect far away images onto flat surfaces.
In 1839, the perception of reality was further revolutionized by the invention of the Daguerreotype and the Calotype, these being the first two types of photographic images. Photography became accepted in art because of its assistance in supplying the growing middle class patronage, therefore fulfilling their urge for immediate images and entertainment.

In the terms of "the Masters", the truest quest of art is to depict nature as it truely exists. A photograph acheives this goal surpassing the efforts of all other artistic mediums. Yet the question remains whether or not the photographers themselves are true artists.

Another theory is that artists must contribute their personal spirit into their creations. Could it be possible that a photographer using a mechanical/digital device, that creates the image, could impose their personal spirit into the finished photograph?

Ernest Lacan, the French journalist once said, "photography is like a mistress whom one cherishes and hides, about whom one speaks with joy but does not want others to mention".

There are three views of photography commonly discussed in all realms of art by critics, painters, and photographers pertaining to whether photography is beneficial to art or whether it is art at all. The first view is that photography is not an art because it is produced with a mechanical/digital device and by chemical and physical phenomenon not by hand and inspiration. The second view is that photographs would be useful to art but should not be equal in creativeness to painting and drawing. The final theory is that because photography is so similar to lithography and etching then it would be beneficial to the arts as well as culture.

Photography has played a controversial but an important role in the arts for the last 150 years. The question still remains whether photography is an art or a new form of documentation seen by the eye instead of the mind.

  • Listening to: Richie Hawtin - We Want Techno
  • Reading: ...something on the internet...
  • Watching: Family Guy
  • Playing: Pacman
  • Eating: Ketchup
  • Drinking: Tea with rum
Add a Comment:
 
:iconsquirrelflight-77:
Squirrelflight-77 Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2011
:nod: very interesting read~ :)
Reply
:iconmindwarp-hs:
mindwarp-hs Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2010
As a journalist photos should be documentary like, on the other hand it must be also a relatively new kind of art, showing the individual and unique vision of each artist. Really is there anybody here who have never stared a photo for minutes thinking how it was made, and was amused by the perspectior or an extraordinary vision, which is among the regular tourist shots :) This makes it art definately :P
Reply
:iconjames-marsh:
James-Marsh Featured By Owner Apr 21, 2010
well it says something that last year a magazine I read called Amateur Photographer celebrated its 125th birthday - having been publish every week since 1884(Oct 10 1884 - present).

:)
Reply
:iconjakezdaniel:
JakezDaniel Featured By Owner Nov 3, 2008  Hobbyist General Artist
Photography can bring art.
Photography is a medium, a tool, just like the pen, piano... it's the artist who makes the art not the tool.
Reply
:iconmgilpin:
mgilpin Featured By Owner Oct 12, 2008
it is really good to see someone using their journal to think/talk about art...
Reply
:iconhoratziu1977:
horatziu1977 Featured By Owner Oct 14, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
:worship:
Reply
:icongreen-shad0w:
green-shad0w Featured By Owner Oct 10, 2008  Student Artist
cum a zis si Alexandru mai sus e indeed foarte interesant
plus ca am avut pt prima data rabdarea sa citesc jurnalul cuiva de pe dA pana la capat fara sa ma plictisesc :D
Reply
:iconhoratziu1977:
horatziu1977 Featured By Owner Oct 14, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
Multumesc!:hug:
Reply
:icongreen-shad0w:
green-shad0w Featured By Owner Oct 14, 2008  Student Artist
:hug:
Reply
:iconkoszock:
KOSZOCK Featured By Owner Oct 9, 2008
Hey good job on this article.

Well, it's an old discussion weather art or not.

I think everyone who has read at least one Ansel Adams book knows; photography just has to be art.

To look at this from the logical point of view:

If you have 2 people standing at the same spot at the same time, having the same capture device mechanical/digital, afterwards editing them with the same software (or with the same chemicals if we are talking about film).
So if the device is the marking point and the photographer is not an artist the shots should look exactly the same.

Fortunately they won't. Someone might shoot the sky darker as it is while the other one tries to expose the whole scene.
Someone might saturate the sky a bit more than it already was, someone desaturates it.

The interesting to watch photography is a combination of your emotions, intents and knowledge (regardless to photography).

Tell a robot to go outside your house at 7:33, and take a shot with F2.8, 1/50 shutter and 100 ISO and afterwards add 10% green to it.

This is a device and not an artist.
Reply
:iconhoratziu1977:
horatziu1977 Featured By Owner Oct 10, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
Thanks dude!I'm entirely with you on this one!Your comment is about common sense...but the problem is...not everyone thinking like that...unfortunately!
Reply
:iconalexandru1988:
Alexandru1988 Featured By Owner Oct 9, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
foarte interesant :) mi-a făcut mare plăcere să citesc chestia asta. eu cred că este un nou fel de artă, mai degrabă cu mintea decât cu mâna creatoare. de fapt, arta suferă nişte schimbări fundamentale faţă de perioadele trecute.

:peace:
Reply
:iconhoratziu1977:
horatziu1977 Featured By Owner Oct 9, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
Multumesc!Si eu sunt de aceiasi parere!:peace:
Reply
:iconalexandru1988:
Alexandru1988 Featured By Owner Oct 9, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
times are changing :) eu mă aştept la din ce în ce mai multe schimbări chiar şi în domeniul artistic, mai ales că de foarte curând a început să se accepte şi opere digitale ca facând parte din artă :giggle:
Reply
:iconhoratziu1977:
horatziu1977 Featured By Owner Oct 9, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
Mi se pare normal...fotografia atat clasica cat si cea digitala este o arta si cel mai bun argument la adus KOSZOCK in commentul lui la acest jurnal!
:strong:
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
October 9, 2008
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
9,067 (1 today)
Favourites
0
Comments
15
×