photography isnt art

How is it not art?

------------------

that is quite jibtastic, sir.

'skiboards look horrible on rails, they do however looking amazing over 15 foot tables.'

-mommy on snowlerbladlerering
 
FINALLY! Someone agrees with me. It's cool yes, but how could you call it art?

----2ond in Command of DANSA-----

To Huck. v. The act of throwing oneself off of a cornice, cliff, rock, or any other thing that results in an attempt to fly.

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.

GW Award December 3, 2004
 
well... it doesnt take much imagination to take a picture. sure, you can pretend your all king shit of art hill and take it from an angle you think is awesome, but baby, it aint art. FIRE DEPARTMENT.

 
^have you ever seen pictures of an artist working with photography? it definitely is art.

and its not that easy to shoot a good pic

__________________________________________

riding skiboards is like banging fat chicks.....it might be fun, but you dont tell your friends about it. - weenox
 
^ Sure, you press a button. Definitly a tough task if you have no fingers.

----2ond in Command of DANSA-----

To Huck. v. The act of throwing oneself off of a cornice, cliff, rock, or any other thing that results in an attempt to fly.

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.

GW Award December 3, 2004
 
wow mommy, lets see you take a photograph like ansel adams did then tell me it's not hard.

-Ira

Member No. 8857

Viva La Rèsistance

i think the hustle dance is pretty sick - DENALI44
 
It's more than pressing a button. It's the right light exposure, the right angle, the manual focus, that is just the 'pressing a button' part. Then they make it art by developing it at different exposures, contrasts, and use tricks like lapping over other images to make it into art, not just a plain old picture. It is art.

We'll have you dead pretty soon.
 
a reguar point-click shot at a party of your drunk friends isnt art, yet ansle adams shots were art, along with alot of others. a stick figure isnt art but a picasso is, it depends on how its taken

skogenjake: i got owned hardcore. i though he was a real little cunt

 
depends on how you define art.

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of

arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly

proclaiming...'Wow! What a ride!'
 
no there is one definition for art. you can make up your own but it'll still be wrong.

-Ira

Member No. 8857

Viva La Rèsistance

i think the hustle dance is pretty sick - DENALI44
 
what you do in the black room is art

� � � � � � � � � � � �
 
the reason i started his thread is because on this website, under pictures> art, there is nothing but shitty photographs. not art at all.

 
you obviously are not a serious photographer. I have just started taking it more serious and I am blown away at the complexity. You need to get your hands on a fully mechanical manual camera and try to take consistantly good pictures.

 
mommy stop posting worthless threads just to add to post #s

The bible is just literature and the church is a glorified book club.

acholcol makes me its bitch

some christian kid today: 'Get drunk off jesus'
 
point and shoot photography sucks, and the latest sensation in technology is point and shoot digital cameras that take no skill to use. i enjoy using SLR cameras, none of this point and shoot nonsense.

-chris
 
photography is definitely art, especially compared to some of the crazy modern art they have these days

Lateralis, on his turn-ons:

'a shaved box, i dont want no fucken rain forest greeting me when i tear off those little cotton panties, id much rather have a nice gaping axe wound that is dripping with wetness while i stare at it in amazement and eat that shit like its elephant food!'
 
It is so art are you kidding me, i hace taken many classes on video and pictures and its not only an art of the eye but also an art of developing and getting it right, there is so much more to photography

 
aspens-vertLG.jpg'


art.

106-0641_img.w492.jpg'


not art.

-Pat
 
photography isnt art. its you taking a machine that somebody eles created and snapping pictures of something somebody eles or nature created. you dont need much skill or imagination to do that. same with photo shop, total bullshit, having a fucking computer make a work of art for you is complete shit.

 
throwing something that someone else crweated onto paper made from naure sure as hell isn't either.

-Pat
 
photography and i mean serious manual photography is art, using a camera that is all programed and all you have to do is push a button is not art. But when you are serious about it you can do so much with a scene, like adjust what you are focusing on, use different lenses and filters, change the aperture and a whole bunch of other stuff to get the effect that you want. It also takes a creative eye to pick out some sweet pictures. Sure any person can fluke out every once in a while and snap a good picture but when you put effort into it i'd say it is art.

-Ryan
 
dude ^ definitive post right there. all posting can stop now.

-Ira

Member No. 8857

Viva La Rèsistance

i think the hustle dance is pretty sick - DENALI44
 
photography sucks. not art.

ill be super rich and own mt.hood and let everybody from ns ski for free... except freezed

-hoodratz47
 
whoever says that photography isnt an art is obviously verrrry ignorant.. there is a LOT i repeat LOT more to it than pointing and pressing a button.. take courses and youll see

 
So what then mommy?

Are photographers just glorified mechanical operators?

I should say that just because you use a machine, or more generally a tool, that you are therefore not an artist? Is that to say that digital artists who use computers are also not artists? Or, furthermore if we're going to look at the camera as a tool - is the painter not an artist because he uses a brush, which is a tool all the same?

Man's use of tools or mechanical objects does not mean he is not an artist. A 'tool' is merely a means of portraying his vision of the world.

A camera enables the photographer to capture the world within in a frame. And if he is a skilled photographer, an artist, then he is able to convey emotion and feeling through his work.

To rule out photography as an art form, you must first define art.

Art n.

Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature.

The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.

The study of these activities.

The product of these activities; human works of beauty considered as a group.

High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value.

Photography is all that.

The person who clicks the shutter frames the world and is able to capture our existence, the human condition, in such a way that he can stir the heart and mind of the viewer. They may be mechanical operators, but they nonetheless posess the capability to convey something - as do all artists.

You cannot rule out photography as an art form simply based on its means.

-AndrewP

----------------------

Per solitudinem ardere in remedium formidinis dictitabat.

'It is often said that the best remedy for fear is to burn alone.'

 
I don't think so...

-AndrewP

----------------------

Per solitudinem ardere in remedium formidinis dictitabat.

'It is often said that the best remedy for fear is to burn alone.'

 
^Whoops... completely wrong thread.

Disregard that.

-AndrewP

----------------------

Per solitudinem ardere in remedium formidinis dictitabat.

'It is often said that the best remedy for fear is to burn alone.'

 
someone delete those two posts, they take away from his credibility. that was a great explanation man.

-Ira

Member No. 8857

Viva La Rèsistance

i think the hustle dance is pretty sick - DENALI44
 
I think Chris O Connel said it best somewhere on the WSKI extras: ' Awww man, anyone can take pictures!!'

I seriously love pictures, I think that they're great. They can be more meaningful than anything else. I love taking pictures too, its cool to make stuff that wouldn't normally be anything special look cool.

But I think art is about creation. I mean personally I wouldn't really know cause I don't consider myself to be an artist. Taking a picture doesn't really ever involving creating anything from scratch. You might take a new angle on something and make an awesome image. But when you draw or paint, you start with a blank piece of paper and you create an entire image yourself. And if you can do that...SICK. People who can draw and paint and sculpt and stuff have soooo much talent, and I'm stoked for them.

I take pictures of stuff that looks cool. I have never taken pictures of stuff that ' means something.' That's bull. I'm sorry, it's just really dumb when every single kid gets a camera in his hand and runs outside taking a hundred pictures of a curb and claims that within his picture is the entire meaning of everything that has ever bother each and every single teenager ever.

So no photography is not art. It's sick, and I love it, definitely more so than I like art. But for the sake of not over using either of the two, its not art.

- Patrick·patproductions.com

Looks like rain to me.
 
yeah photos are sweet when you want to remember something like a birthday, but i think if you want to see something like nature as how it is in full fidelity, just open your eyes and remember it.

don't worry about the label 'art' any more, though. subway workers are 'sandwich artists'. what the fuck.

..:: d a n c e y o u f u c k e r s ! ::..
 
Photography is more than a medium for factual communication of ideas. It is a creative art. -Ansel Adams

You don't take a photograph, you make it. -Ansel Adams

Photography, as a powerful medium of expression and communications, offers an infinite variety of perception, interpretation and execution. -Ansel Adams

___________________

~never be bought. never be sold~

please vote 10 for my jones soda picture My Picture

 
now tell me killy, you can just open your eyes and see the tsunami and the earthquake? tell me the truth...

-Ira

Member No. 8857

Viva La Rèsistance

i think the hustle dance is pretty sick - DENALI44
 
I agree with capurnicus. I'v never in my life gone and taken a picture and thought about it having some 'deeper meaning' , or artistic merit. Anyone can take a photo, and most of the time it doesn't look like anything special.

I wouldn't call photography 'art' , but rather, something that takes a bit of skill to do well. Anyone can take a photo, but a good photographer can take a photo that looks really nice that people enjoy looking at. Calling every random picture of a brick wall or puddle art is taking it too far, because, honestly, a blind dog with 3 legs could probably have taken the same shot.

In my view, photography is a technical skill. Learn to see potential good photos, good lighting, and good subject's, and then put them together to make something that looks nice.

Sorry, but im in a very honest and straight forward mood right now, and I am also tired of seeing a lot of terrible, non visually appealing photos of nothing which are supposed to be 'art'.

******************

Michael La Anyane

mauiimedia.com photography
 
To me art is expression. Art is reaching down inside yourself and using whatever tool you have in front of you to express your feelings, emotions, and share your perspective.

I believe we all have some form of artistical talent, we just haven't all necesarrily found which tool best works for us.

Painters, musicians, poets, dancers, sculptors, graphic artists, and yes even photographers are all artists... Each using a different medium to share their perspective.

In my opinion, even a point and shoot photographer is an artist. Yes, he does not create anything, but by him capturing a moment, a perspective, and a certain lighting on something he is sharing with you his perspective.. His expression. That is art to me.

A photographer uses his tools to express himself just as a painter uses his own. A photographer's tools are different though. He has his environment around him, lenses, angle, lighting, aperture, etc. all to capture one moment of something that has some meaning for him. Even if that meaning is nothing other then it 'looks cool'. Well, that is still his perspective on what looks cool and his way of sharing it with you.

Someone who feels depressed is very unlikely to take pictures of bright flowers. No, instead he will most likely use his environment and any settings he has to use to capture something that expresses how he feels.. a cold, sad, dark, and lonely object.

Using your tools to express yourself in a creative way, that is art.. And I believe that there is an art form in almost all things.

Eat. Sleep. Breathe. Ski.

 
i'm agreeing with mauii on this one... it does take skill cause i had tried to take some good shots with my new camera... some turned out good, bt others looked like shit cause of low exposure. and then the shots i had taken in daylight looked good. it may not look like art but it certainly can be apreciated by most.

___________________________________________________

'Belong, Thats a Very Sexist Way To Talk About these Bitches'- Ali G

-

Get On Your Knees And Smile Like A Doughnut

-

TheSaying Around Here Is: Go Big Or Go HOME

-

The Original Pornographer of NS
 
I just noticed that ec-andrew was saying pretty much the exact same thing I was.

Eat. Sleep. Breathe. Ski.

 
A photographer is not limited to reality. he or she can manipulate the photo through lenses, filters and other techniques to create something totally unique. The camera is not merely a reflecting pool and the photographs are not exactly the mirror revealing exactly what is present. The product is dependent on the imagination and creativity of the photographer.

 
fotography is definitly art...

man it's a lot of work

when you take a picture it's your own point of vew that you express... then by developing the picture and by setting the exposure and everything it's creating a personal vew with is own representation of the thing that was taken in foto. If you're taking pics with a litlle codak shit and then go put the films at the walmart it's not art, but if you develop your own pictures and setting all the things like exposition, light and stuff it'S Art

Pag

*NORTHEAST CULT*

membre du *Quebec Riders Cult*
 
Capurnicus...

So photographers aren't creators? Just image archivists, struggling to capture things in a new and profound way?

I disagree.

What about studio photography? You create a scene, you set up your camera, you take the film to get developed or process it yourself. You take careful steps to create certain effects.

This is all very similiar to what a painter would do with his still life. He uses light, objects, symbolism, all these things to create a painting.

Whats the difference?

Well the photographer has the unique ability to capture the scene in an instant. A painter has the same ability, but it takes him much longer.

So what now?

Are we going to demerit the photographer because it took him less time? That's ludicrous. You wouldn't demerit a painter who took less time than another painter to capture the scene.

You say the photographer isn't really creating?

Well is the painter really creating?

A photographer uses chemicals, gears, mirrors, timers, springs, film strips, lenses, dials, rotors and so much more to capture the scene. He is a mechanical manipulator. But the photographer didn't make his own camera. So he's really using someone else's tool.

Well the painter is no different. Chances are he didn't create his own paint, pigments, dyes, gesso, weave his own canvas, or tie his own brushes.

Both men use the tools of others to create art.

You simply cannot diminish the artistic credibility of a photographer simply because he uses a machine or takes less time.

The use of machines does not mean one is not an artist. (Tell that to welder who creates towering sculptures.)

A lengthy period of creation does not make one an artist. Creation can be instaneous, or time consuming. And art my friend - is creation.

-AndrewP

----------------------

Per solitudinem ardere in remedium formidinis dictitabat.

'It is often said that the best remedy for fear is to burn alone.'

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top