Comments on: Are Photographers Artists? http://galerieverdun.com/art_blog/20070228/are-photographers-artists/ Choice Rantings of an Art Freak Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:58:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1 By: Arteccentrix - Nickola McCoy http://galerieverdun.com/art_blog/20070228/are-photographers-artists/#comment-12 Arteccentrix - Nickola McCoy Sat, 03 Mar 2007 03:23:45 +0000 http://galerieverdun.com/art_blog/20070228/are-photographers-artists/#comment-12 A thoroughly thought provoking and intelligently written piece and an angle that should give many people pause for thought on the subject. It's late here, but I saw your comment on my blog and had to pay you a visit. From what I've seen so far I'll be back again for more :-) Thanks for a very good art blog - you've been blogrolled! A thoroughly thought provoking and intelligently written piece and an angle that should give many people pause for thought on the subject.

It’s late here, but I saw your comment on my blog and had to pay you a visit. From what I’ve seen so far I’ll be back again for more :-) Thanks for a very good art blog - you’ve been blogrolled!

]]> By: codec http://galerieverdun.com/art_blog/20070228/are-photographers-artists/#comment-200 codec Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:46:42 +0000 http://galerieverdun.com/art_blog/20070228/are-photographers-artists/#comment-200 hi this is one answer me as an artist ha wanted to know, also i have answered is photography an art? well yes infact it is read this. If you look at a photograph (take natural scenery) it is just a copy of what you have seen. You can make the photo better changing the camera to a much better one, or even change the technology, but can you change the scenery?. With painting you can express your feelings, views, emotions, etc. you can change the scenery on a painting and make it more beautiful that it already is, or make it look worse. You can’t do that naturally with photography, but you can use Photoshop to make the image better or worse. Take pain or a mental condition for instance, you can show this in paintings and how the person is suffering from it. But in photography you can’t show this, you can show someone looking like their in pain and that’s all. Photography is a type of art in a way which gives you an exact picture which you can’t modify naturally; you can adjust the setting like (zoom, brightness and colour etc). A camera is mainly used to capture the most precious moments in life and also meanings. In paintings, you can show what is happening and who is in it, with photography you can’t really express your thoughts, so it is quite hard to explain what is happening in the image. Paintings can be an eye to your mind. In paintings, you have complete control over what the composition will end up like, (the colours, the lighting, etc). In photography, you have to find a way to accomplish the perfect lighting, angle, shadow, etc. Many people prefer photography to art, as you don’t need to bother trying to show the shape or texture, as you need to in art. hi this is one answer me as an artist ha wanted to know, also i have answered is photography an art? well yes infact it is read this.

If you look at a photograph (take natural scenery) it is just a copy of what you have seen. You can make the photo better changing the camera to a much better one, or even change the technology, but can you change the scenery?.

With painting you can express your feelings, views, emotions, etc. you can change the scenery on a painting and make it more beautiful that it already is, or make it look worse.
You can’t do that naturally with photography, but you can use Photoshop to make the image better or worse.

Take pain or a mental condition for instance, you can show this in paintings and how the person is suffering from it. But in photography you can’t show this, you can show someone looking like their in pain and that’s all.

Photography is a type of art in a way which gives you an exact picture which you can’t modify naturally; you can adjust the setting like (zoom, brightness and colour etc).
A camera is mainly used to capture the most precious moments in life and also meanings.

In paintings, you can show what is happening and who is in it, with photography you can’t really express your thoughts, so it is quite hard to explain what is happening in the image.

Paintings can be an eye to your mind.

In paintings, you have complete control over what the composition will end up like, (the colours, the lighting, etc). In photography, you have to find a way to accomplish the perfect lighting, angle, shadow, etc.

Many people prefer photography to art, as you don’t need to bother trying to show the shape or texture, as you need to in art.

]]> By: Anonymous http://galerieverdun.com/art_blog/20070228/are-photographers-artists/#comment-204 Anonymous Fri, 23 Nov 2007 06:17:53 +0000 http://galerieverdun.com/art_blog/20070228/are-photographers-artists/#comment-204 Photography IS painting, with light! You can NOT say that you can't capture a photographers state of mind or emotion or what is happening with both the photographer and the subject, because is the execution, photographers make the same exact decisions as painters to portray feeling and emotion- considering light, color, texture, angle, etc. A photographer makes these choices based on time of day or year, cloudy or sunny, filtered/unfiltered, zoomed/deadpan, etc. While a painter makes these decisions based on absolutely no constraints such as these, but these elements hold true in both situations, making both provocative and captivating. A picture of a person is just as emotional as a painting, as you still ask yourself in both situations- why did the artist chose this person? why is this person feeling/looking like this? Is this documentation of the artist? Are we relating to it? Is the artist relating to this person, in turn relating to us? And all indications of answers are conveyed through light, color, texture, composition, etc- all elements present in both painting and photo! oh and to say that a camera is meant to capture only the precious moments in life, we can say the same about painting and scenery. Either way is only referencing to it's more commercially, "historical", social use and not considering the WIDELY artistic USE of it. As painting could be pin hold as the only method to capture landscapes of serene places that then in turn end up in gold frames on walls of old fancy houses. In conclusion- they are both the same. You can construct as scene either way, mind you in different ways of execution and process, that hold their purpose in the consideration of the artist, subject, light, time, color, texture, composition, etc. They are the same in that you should ask yourself the same questions in interpreting both, and consider only in process what makes them different. And then asking how that difference makes a difference in the artists life and interpretation, not your own, and strictly to the literal work itself. Photography IS painting, with light!
You can NOT say that you can’t capture a photographers state of mind or emotion or what is happening with both the photographer and the subject, because is the execution, photographers make the same exact decisions as painters to portray feeling and emotion- considering light, color, texture, angle, etc.
A photographer makes these choices based on time of day or year, cloudy or sunny, filtered/unfiltered, zoomed/deadpan, etc. While a painter makes these decisions based on absolutely no constraints such as these, but these elements hold true in both situations, making both provocative and captivating. A picture of a person is just as emotional as a painting, as you still ask yourself in both situations- why did the artist chose this person? why is this person feeling/looking like this? Is this documentation of the artist? Are we relating to it? Is the artist relating to this person, in turn relating to us? And all indications of answers are conveyed through light, color, texture, composition, etc- all elements present in both painting and photo!
oh and to say that a camera is meant to capture only the precious moments in life, we can say the same about painting and scenery. Either way is only referencing to it’s more commercially, “historical”, social use and not considering the WIDELY artistic USE of it. As painting could be pin hold as the only method to capture landscapes of serene places that then in turn end up in gold frames on walls of old fancy houses.
In conclusion- they are both the same. You can construct as scene either way, mind you in different ways of execution and process, that hold their purpose in the consideration of the artist, subject, light, time, color, texture, composition, etc.
They are the same in that you should ask yourself the same questions in interpreting both, and consider only in process what makes them different. And then asking how that difference makes a difference in the artists life and interpretation, not your own, and strictly to the literal work itself.

]]>