When Photography no longer photography?

[Reverend]

With more and more photography and photographers going from film to digital, and then editing in Photoshop, where is the line drawn between Photography and just .... art?

When does the definition of what you are doing transmogrify into photo manipulation?

Should this question be muted by the definition of art?


Just bored and wanting to stir the pot... :mrgreen:

 

[Lol999]

That's one of my thoughts. When does it stop being photography and turn into graphic art? back in the day, when I was a serious luddite, I didn't even hold with grad filters for sunsets! it disappoints me when I see first place winners in a photo competition have took a photo digitally then played with it in photoshop. What chance does a film photographer with only his highstreet processors to rely on have? I think it's time they had separate competitions for digital and film photographers.

Lol

 

[danalec99]

Exactly! Kids these days with their digital crap, fancy lens, 35mm, 120mm, Velvia, 4x5, 8x10....oohhh and that Uelsmann guy... isn't that abomination to Art?!


Pass me the charcoal please....

 

[mysteryscribe]

Charcoal you whimp, it's blood on the cave wall....

 

[danalec99]

I see... now its Charcoal vs Blood, huh? :lmao:

Btw, my cave wall is better than yours!!

 

[mysteryscribe]

yes but i have the southern exposure

 

[Hertz van Rental]

If you search through this Forum you will find a thread along these lines where we discussed the definition of Photography and it turned into a debate about where the line was.

 

[bigfatbadger]

It's art, art's art. Look at it, do you like it? There you go then, does it matter how it was produced?

 

[Torus34]

This discussion isn't limited to photography. The first audience for The Rite of Spring apparantly held discourse on whether it was or was not music. The non-objective school of painting faced a similar discussion. The list can be easily lengthened.