HELP: How does a photographer's origin influence their perception of culture?

[Bifurcator]

It's amazing just how many people give this answer, or something similar, when asked this question.
A little thought and it can be seen that it is far from satisfactory as an answer as it does not explain anything but is merely a definition.
It's like responding to the question 'what is Art?'

Not to me. "Art" is something I do. Sometimes it involves photography, sometimes 3D or 2D tools on a computer, sometimes paints or pencils, sometimes a tree-stump and a chain-saw. Photography is a medium the art itself. And his question was phrased in an inadequate way if he was looking for any other kind of answer.

He didn't ask "what does photography mean to you", "what are your feelings about your photography" or anything that would lead the reader to think he was after any other answer than a definition. The answers are only as on point as the questions and the question as he phrased it was "What is photography?". Any other answer but a definition would require a lot of imaginative interjection IMO. Or if you're right then let him ask that question in an intelligent way.

Also the act of viewing, critiquing, sorting, transporting, standing on, or jumping over a photograph outside of the creation process has nothing to do with photography. Certainly nothing more than doing any of those things to a car, oil painting, building, or tree has to do with the creative processes that bring those things into existence or their temporal origins.

 

[Bifurcator]

Not one of your better responses David :er:

Really? I thought it was hilarious - certainly the best reply here.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

"Art" is something I do. Sometimes it involves photography, sometimes 3D or 2D tools on a computer, sometimes paints or pencils, sometimes a tree-stump and a chain-saw. Photography is a medium the art itself. And his question was phrased in a retarded way if he was looking for any other kind of answer.

He didn't ask "what does photography mean to you", "what are your feelings about your photography" or anything that would lead the reader to think he was after any other answer than a definition. The answers are only as on point as the questions and the question as he phrased it was "What is photography?". Any other answer but a definition would require a lot of imaginative interjection IMO. Or if you're right then let him ask that question in an intelligent way.

What was asked was "In your opinion, what is photography?".
Firstly, this is quite clearly not asking for a definition, it is asking for an opinion.
Now your opinion may well be that photography is nothing more than 'the process of capturing light on a light sensitive medium'. But this, as I have said, is just describing the process of Photography.
Now I interpreted the question as being about the 'discipline' of Photography because it was quite clear from the questions that followed that this was more what was wanted.
To understand where the problem lies, let us look at your usage of the word medium.
You said 'Photography is the process of capturing light on a light sensitive medium'.
But then you declare that 'Photography is a medium'.
As I assume that you didn't mean that 'Photography is the process of capturing light on a light sensitive Photography' you must have used the term medium to mean two distinctly different things.
To amplify this: 'painting' can mean both the act of applying paint to a surface, and the finished work itself - 'I'm painting a painting'.
Whilst not incorrect this is clumsy so we tend to differentiate by saying 'I am painting' and 'this is a painting'.
And this is quite apart from the word's use to describe the discipline of Painting - which covers everything: use of materials, application, techniques and all the other things associated with 'painting a painting'.
The term 'Photography' is less ambiguous. The usual convention is that it refers to the discipline itself and not to a specific area, such as the photographic process.
So please do not start insulting people by calling their questions 'retarded' or 'unintelligent' when you are the one at fault - you misread the question.

 

[Bifurcator]

What was asked was "In your opinion, what is photography?".

Same thing almost exactly. The qualifier "in your opinion" is nearly meaningless as there's just about no question I can answer that isn't "my opinion" and therefor only qualifies that the answer must be my own and not someone else's.

The question stands as it was stated: "What is photography?"


And don't be silly. Photography is a process as I said. I was addressing your misconceptions that "photography" in and of itself was somehow "art" when I used the word "medium". So nya-nya.

I do understand what you're saying but this isn't what he asked. To get that intention from his question I would have to make some very far reaching assumptions. You did. I didn't. That's all there is to it to me.

The term 'Photography' is less ambiguous. The usual convention is that it refers to the discipline itself and not to a specific area, such as the photographic process.

That doesn't make any sense to me. The discipline of photography is not dissimilar to the photographic process. The discipline is the application of said process.

Additionally I guess a question that misses the intended mark so badly technically qualifies as retarded. I didn't say mentally retarded and I wasn't insulting anyone - nor did I call anyone unintelligent. So please don't put words in my mouth or intentions in my mind. Your assumption might have been accidentally correct in his case... it was not in mine.

 

[Bifurcator]

retarded:
verb
delayed or held back in terms of progress, development, or accomplishment : his progress was retarded by his limp.

Like that...

But I'll change it if it offends you...