Is photography an art?

Discussion in 'Creative Corner' started by slackercruster, Nov 23, 2016.

  1. slackercruster

    slackercruster Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    509
    Trophy Points:
    113
  2. xwsmithx

    xwsmithx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2016
    Messages:
    3,964
    Likes Received:
    1,743
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Can I split the difference and say yes and no? While there are examples of photography that could qualify as art, most photography does not. Most photography is a record of something, and not a deliberate creation. I specifically would exclude any photograph of something that is itself art (a photo of a design element of an art deco building, for example), a photograph of nature, animals, or scenery (the beauty is in the original, not in the photo), and any still taken from a movie (accidental catch, not deliberate creation). All of these can qualify as great photographs, but I wouldn't call them art.
     
  3. HereWeGoAgain

    HereWeGoAgain Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2016
    Messages:
    27,942
    Likes Received:
    19,979
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not all photography is art. A family photo taken by uncle Billy is not art. Knowing how to capture the light or the moment, or how to get just the right perspective, to make a photograph that stirs the soul, is art.
     
  4. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your logical is flawed. If I said if vacuum cleaners were not art then one vacuum would be as good as the next, I am not sure anybody would take me seriously, yet that is your logic.

    Art is largely a visual expression, so anything visual could be art in the right context.
     

Share This Page