Photography as Art?

TheLostPhotographer · Jun 30, 2007

I'm interested to get some feedback on how different people from different parts of the world value art photography. I've started threads about this on UK based web forums, and no doubt it has been discussed here in the past.

One of my favourite photographers - Thomas Struth seems to be recognised/appreciated far more in the US than in the UK or, even his home country Germany. He had a retrospective exhibition at MoMa in NY. In Europe you would be very unlikely to see a solo Struth exhibition outside of a small circle of elitist photographic galleries. Although, I am told he is more frequently news in the UK these days (I haven't visited London since leaving over Two years ago).

I would like to know whether photographers like Struth make it outside of art circles in the States (and any other country) into the domain of the general public or, not.

And, I would also like to know who are your favourite art photographers. The term 'art photographer' in this instance applies to any photographers that exhibit or, publish their work in an art context as art. That's my interpretation, but I would be very interested to know how others define art photography.

An open discussion about photography presented as art.

See, I could have said all that in one line

Few will still be reading this far down.

Oh, and why isn't there an 'Art Photography' forum here?

mysteryscribe · Jun 30, 2007

To judge how people really feel about art you have to ask them have you bought another photographer's art photograph. I like photographs as art and my walls are full of it but it's things I shot. So I have to say I don't view photos as art I would but. But then I don't fill my walls with anything but My photographs.

Iron Flatline · Jun 30, 2007

I have pretension of art, in the sense that I work up pieces specifically to be printed large and hung in my house.

I own two "major" pieces by other artists, one by Ruud van Empel, and one by Simen Johan. I say major because each cost me over $10,000.

However, I purchased both specifically because their process goes beyond photography, in the sense that their work is of a composite nature. I am only buying work that focuses on a process that I could not emulate.

sabbath999 · Jun 30, 2007

TheLostPhotographer said:
Oh, and why isn't there an 'Art Photography' forum here?

OK, I am going to be way brief here since I am typing this on my Blackberry.

I am not at all a big believer that photography is "fine art" in general. There are obvioisly exceptions, but by-and-large I think most photography is craft and not art.

If anybody cares why, I will be glad to explain in the future when I have a keyboard bigger than 3 inches across.

skieur · Jun 30, 2007

My mother.

skieur

Iron Flatline · Jul 1, 2007

skieur said:
My mother.

skieur

?

fmw · Jul 1, 2007

sabbath999 said:
OK, I am going to be way brief here since I am typing this on my Blackberry.

I am not at all a big believer that photography is "fine art" in general. There are obvioisly exceptions, but by-and-large I think most photography is craft and not art.

If anybody cares why, I will be glad to explain in the future when I have a keyboard bigger than 3 inches across.

In my opinion, almost all photography is craft and not art. Certainly all of mine is. For me art requires the creation of something unique from scratch and, even with that, most creations are still craft. I'm a musician. I view music composition as art but music performance as craft, as an example. Acting is craft. Some writing is art. Most is craft. Most painting and sculpture are art. Design is art.

Don't misunderstand. Craft can be very creative and good photography is certainly creative. It can be emotive and good photography is so.

This is all a matter of definition of course, but that's mine.

Iron Flatline · Jul 1, 2007

Except under unusual circumstances, art is usually also craft. I know there's a lot people who stand around museums saying "my four-year old does better stuff 'n this..." but the fact is that most of these artists (Jackson Pollock and Mark Rothko come to mind, as do Picasso and Mondrian) actually know the craft - they've just decided to go outside of it.

I know I spoke of process, but that's part of the point: the art would be impossible without the craft.

"...almost all photography is craft and not art" is true - except when the photographer declares it art. It is not just about the beholder, but also about the creator.

Seefutlung · Jul 1, 2007

Iron Flatline said:
Except under unusual circumstances, art is usually also craft. I know there's a lot people who stand around museums saying "my four-year old does better stuff 'n this..." but the fact is that most of these artists (Jackson Pollock and Mark Rothko come to mind, as do Picasso and Mondrian) actually know the craft - they've just decided to go outside of it.

I know I spoke of process, but that's part of the point: the art would be impossible without the craft.

"...almost all photography is craft and not art" is true - except when the photographer declares it art. It is not just about the beholder, but also about the creator.

I second your thought that most is craft only the exception is art. For art photography try this forum ... supposed to be a forum geared more for "professionals" and "artists".
http://www.openphotographyforums.com/index.php

Gary

DRodgers · Jul 1, 2007

To be blunt if a 2 year old paints something is it art because it used a brush and paint ?

Art is made by an artist and whether he tools may be a camera, brush , clay etc its still an art form when he follows basic guide lines set out in art schools over the decades....

And just to be difficult "art is in the eye of the beholder " something like that anyways.

I once bought a image from David White a pro photography here in Ontario why because it was a close up of his wifes oil paint palette It was an amazing shot and I thought it was art.

deanimator · Jul 1, 2007

I recently had a show which created a bit of a nervous stir...a buddy said, "oooh, I think you made the people a bit uncomfortable here"

I was not really surprised but still I discussed this with a professional poet who knows what I do...his response was quite simple:
"It´s our job to MAKE people uncomfortable".

This is a partial explanation of part of the responsibility we have. I mean this in terms of knowing why you are doing this. Anything can be made well and it is a question of craft. This is only part of the whole when creating what is called "art"...it has an additional purpose.

The tap in my bathroom is exceptionally well made, but it was made with only the purpose of delivering water. Nothing else was intended...or taken. Think about Duchamp´s irritation at the critics when he gave them a ****oir.

(the famous male urinal if you can´t follow the automatic no-brain censor filter here!)