Poll: artistry

[The_Traveler]

art·ist(är

t

st)

1. One, such as a painter, sculptor, or writer, who is able by virtue of imagination and talent or skill to create works of aesthetic value, especially in the fine arts.
2. A person whose work shows exceptional creative ability or skill: You are an artist in the kitchen.
3. One, such as an actor or singer, who works in the performing arts.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

I have noticed several times that people here often reject the term of 'artist' for themselves. Certainly in any skill based craft, being referred to as an 'artist' as what one does seems to be a compliment, implying that one's skills have risen above the general journeyman's level.

In the artistic crafts, most people seem willingly to be 'artists', to try to create something meaningful, to get beyond just the skillful reproduction of an idea.
To me there is no shame in trying to be an artist, to try to create something - and, also to me, that seems to be a willingness to step away from the generally accepted standard of sharpness, contrast, color, etc and to sublimate them to the issues of artistry.

I am not implying that I think of myself as a 'good' artist but only that I am trying.

How do you see yourself?

 

[amolitor]

Almost all the time when I press the shutter button, I am simply recording something of personal value to me.

A small percentage of the time, I am attempting to make art, whatever that is. So, I'm an artist, some of the time. Neither successful nor particularly good, but still an artist.

 

[runnah]

I like to think of myself as creative rather than artistic.

 

[The_Traveler]

Almost all the time when I press the shutter button, I am simply recording something of personal value to me.

A small percentage of the time, I am attempting to make art, whatever that is. So, I'm an artist, some of the time. Neither successful nor particularly good, but still an artist.

No disclaimers necessary, the audience will decide what they think, but please check the poll.

I like to think of myself as creative rather than artistic.

Most people like to think of themselves as creative, even if they only repeat jokes they hear other places, but do you aspire to create?
Please check an option in the poll.

 

[amolitor]

The poll was not yet visible the first time through Voted now!

 

[runnah]

Most people like to think of themselves as creative, even if they only repeat jokes they hear other places, but do you aspire to create?
Please check an option in the poll.

I pride myself on my ability to deliver results in almost any given situation. This involves lots of creative decision making and creative choices about how to do things. I don't know if that makes me an artist when the end result is marketing materials.

 

[sashbar]

I would like to improve both technical and creative ( I prefer this word as well) sides of my photography. Both are important. But also it is very important to me to ensure that the creative side, or creative development is the leading one, because that is what good photography is about to me personally. Technical skill is as important as a properly functioning camera and a clean lense. The ability of a modern equipment compensate your lack of skill more and more efficiently. So to me the technical skill is not a golden coin, this is a gradually diminishing currency. Lack of creativity, on the other side can not be compensated by a better autofocus, noise reduction or blur correction. One can argue that technical prowess and knowledge open new doors for creativity. And this is true to a degree. It will will not make you more creative. It will give you just an opportunity to be creative.
So to me the creative side is the leading one - when you know what you are doing you can utilise a particular equipment and a particular technical skill so to speak. Trying the other way to me is a worrying sign of a photographic cul-de-sac. You can buy the "best" camera, you can polish your skill, but if you do not understand what to apply your skill and equipment to, that's it - this is a photographic cul-de-sac. T

This is the theory. The reality is always in between. Most of us are semi-creative and technically imperfect.

PS. Hell, my English sucks. I hope you can decipher it.

 

[kathyt]

I don't like using that word, and I would never call myself an artist no matter how good I was. It is just not something I ever thought I was or will be. It wasn't in my life plan.

 

[The_Traveler]

The reason I ask is because when I think of an artist I think of people in berets drinking wine and acting snooty. I love art, but hate prototypical artists.

I do consider myself a photographer and a graphic designer. Just not an artist.

The thread, from which that quote was drawn, was also a poll on this issue.
It seems that people have real trouble approaching the subject with honesty but often deflect into humor or sarcastic jibes at others to avoid actually disclosing themselves.
Even the poll-maker really encouraged this hiding by giving humorous options.
That's comfortable but not truthful.
I think that really discloses a fear of being judged and failing, being judged by the Internet world is embarrassing, while being seen as humorous is OK.

There were two consecutive posts that were unusually honest and to the point.

Feels very bold to actually claim that, though. I have no actual education as an artist.

It does doesn't it? I felt the same saying it point blank but one thing I've learned by posting here, you HAVE to own it! Whether it is posting your work or saying you are an artist if you don't believe it nobody else will.

This last is, imo, the most trenchant and important point.

 

[runnah]

The reason I ask is because when I think of an artist I think of people in berets drinking wine and acting snooty. I love art, but hate prototypical artists.

I do consider myself a photographer and a graphic designer. Just not an artist.

The thread, from which that quote was drawn, was also a poll on this issue.
It seems that people have real trouble approaching the subject with honesty but often deflect into humor or sarcastic jibes at others to avoid actually disclosing themselves.
Even the poll-maker really encouraged this hiding by giving humorous options.
That's comfortable but not truthful.
I think that really discloses a fear of being judged and failing, being judged by the Internet world is embarrassing, while being seen as humorous is OK.

There were two consecutive posts that were unusually honest and to the point.

Feels very bold to actually claim that, though. I have no actual education as an artist.

It does doesn't it? I felt the same saying it point blank but one thing I've learned by posting here, you HAVE to own it! Whether it is posting your work or saying you are an artist if you don't believe it nobody else will.

This last is, imo, the most trenchant and important point.

What is your end game here Lew?

I was honest and forthright here and in the older post which you brought up for no particular reason.

 

[Juga]

I think his end point is that you should think of yourself as an artist and not just someone being creative. On the other side of that are you someone that just likes things technically and need to cultivate the artist inside in order to equal things out. I believe photography is definitely a form of art. A brush and paint is just the medium for a painter to convey their artistic view just like a camera is our medium to convey our photographic eye.

Would you tell Picasso that he was just being creative with paint?

 

[limr]

I chose the last option. I've always wanted to be artistic in my endeavors. I found technical proficiency alone to be cold and uninteresting. I wanted to be able to create something that could only come from me. Technical proficiency is necessary to a point so that one has the ability to create the vision in one's head. This is where I fail at traditional arts. I can't draw. I might be better at something like sculpting, but that is not the medium that excited me. If I did want to try it, though, I couldn't just pick up a lump of clay and expect that I would be able to create whatever I wanted. I would have to learn certain technical skills before I could manipulate and use those skills to create something artistic.

In this context of a photo forum, I am certainly referencing my photography, but this all holds true for my first love of writing as well. A writer may be grammatically correct and competent enough in telling a story but those are the books that will never hold my interest. I need to sink my teeth into writing and chew on it for a while. When I am writing, I try for something beyond simple technical proficiency. Otherwise, I don't see the purpose in grammar for its own sake (or in photography, technical perfection for its own sake.) It's a tool and mastery of that tool means I can be creative with it, and yes, maybe even artistic.

So yes, I aspire to artistry but I don't know that I actually achieve it yet.

 

[Steve5D]

I can't think of a reason why a person couldn't be both an artist as well as be someone who strives for technical perfection, but that's not one of the choices.

There are times I shoot to be creative or "artistic", but there are times when I'm shooting for a paycheck. In those instances, what I find "artistic" is of little importance...

 

[wyogirl]

I think of myself as an artist... in many mediums, not just photography....
But I don't know that I am a particularly good one.

 

[The_Traveler]

To say you are an artist means only that you really are trying to create something, to use your skills and your insight to produce something that is more than just a documentary reproduction of what you see.

To be an artist doesn't mean that you are claiming to be good or to be special only that your primary concern is to create art.
There seems to be a resistance to saying that one is an artist, that one is trying to be creative as if, by doing so, you are claiming to be something special.
Many times here, being an 'artist' has been derided.

@ Runnah,

Is it so surprising that since you have embraced the persona of someone is thinks humor is everything and that most things you say are an attempt at humor, that it is impossible for me to tell when you are being honest and trying to be funny?