Photographic Art--Define Please

[MAC]

I'm enjoying it. I've invited folks from other forums over. Hoping that it continues to be interesting.

MAC

This was a good idea for a thread.

-Ed

 

[Ed (;¬ >)]

Art is the mastery of understanding what is appealing to the
masses.

This is a refreshing viewpoint. Art snobs usually define art as anything that can't be understood by the masses.

I am more inclined to the opinion that both are correct and neither, necessarily, has the high road. Who (outside the cloister of one's own soul) is to say that a Pepsi commercial that stirs millions is somehow less artistic than a Dega which stirs only thousands.

An artist is one who understands the science of what
triggers the appeal of the human visual brain.

What about Bach, Bethoven or Mozart?

To understand what
art is one must look in the past and study the masters.

But the masters never appealed to the masses.

Art is a
science of triggering emotion with forms. Some people are borned
with the ability to understand art as some are born to great
mathmaticians. But as in all forms of human creativity one must be
learned in the skills of art to heighten ones ability.

But are they skills? And can they be learned? Or is talent an indefinable inate quality that can only be nurtured and refined?

Larry

-Ed

 

[LMC54]

Being an artist is a tuff life. Since masters didn't have a public relations manager their works never did hit the prime time, that is why a dead artist is more valuble since death heightens awareness. But all great works are appreciated by the masses. Its the merit that takes time to mature.
Larry

 

[LMC54]

I would like to commend you on a worthy thread, about time!
Larry

 

[MAC]

I would like to commend you on a worthy thread, about time!
Larry

Thanks--Yes--not "Silly" with this one and would rather join in from time to time than play cards!

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&page=2&message=1543085

With Sony dropping off large percent on Friday I'm ready to make a play for the stock on Monday if it doesn't jump!

MAC

 

[Ron Warren]

Thanks for the invite to the Sony Forum. In your honor I will go back to April 2000, before I owned a Nikon CP-990 or the Canon D-30, when the only camera that I had was the Sony Mavica FD-88.

I never had an art background but I have always been observant. When I started playing with my camera I learned that art is defined by everyone in their own way. The next 3 photos are what most of my friends and co-workers consider photographic art.

1. This image was taken when I picked my daughters up from day care. I did a lot of Photoshop on it and made it resemble a painting.



2. I just thought this would be neat. I made a duplicate layer of the original and turned myself black and white. There was a man at work who hated me and I hated him. One day when he walked by he stopped and went crazy over this photo. I had to make him an 8x10. He became a friend. Huh?



3. Then there is a hard core group who loves black and white photography and considers it the true art form.



I guess my point is that I don't know when it is art until someone tells me it is and then I will keep in mind that it is art to them not to anyone else. Including me!

I don't really know of any gallerys that I frequent so I can't really resond to that. I do however belive in the spirit of this thread. No use being jerks when we can help each other and ourselves in these forums.
Ron Warren

Alright folks --let's have some fun. Answer 1 through 4 below:

1) Please define Photographic Art....
Here is my definition--You want to blow up the picture in size--;
you want to frame it; folks besides family and friends like to look
at it; it has an interesting and important theme or principle to
it; it is quite unique; you might win the fair with it.

2) Give an example if you like:
Here is mine--I call it "A little girl dreams about being the big
girl"

http://pages.prodigy.net/rmcelheny/dolfin.htm

I used photoshop magic wand, dropper, bucket, etc to blue out the
background where lots of people mingling and one guy had a beer.

3) Suggest one of your favorite photo art gallerys--here is one of
mine:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/places/2001/20010920_local_safari.html

4) Comment politely on the nice folks that post their
comments/photos.
Let's not stir too much on this one like we did with "Predictions
on the Winners" But let's learn from each other on this. Photo
art is my hobby and I want to learn from forum friends!

Best regards,

MAC
http://www.mcelheny.cc

 

[MAC]

Making a new friend over photo art has happened to me also.

Your pics meet the definitions in my opinion; specifically one of my definiions: "folks besides family and friends like to look at it"; "it is unique"

Photo art is usually in my opinion some of the best of one's bunch. For me it is a handful in a thousand shots. Your mix of B/W and color is special and has given me some ideas.

Thanks Ron for your post!

MAC

2. I just thought this would be neat. I made a duplicate layer of
the original and turned myself black and white. There was a man at
work who hated me and I hated him. One day when he walked by he
stopped and went crazy over this photo. I had to make him an 8x10.
He became a friend. Huh?



3. Then there is a hard core group who loves black and white
photography and considers it the true art form.



I guess my point is that I don't know when it is art until someone
tells me it is and then I will keep in mind that it is art to them
not to anyone else. Including me!
I don't really know of any gallerys that I frequent so I can't
really resond to that. I do however belive in the spirit of this
thread. No use being jerks when we can help each other and
ourselves in these forums.
Ron Warren

Alright folks --let's have some fun. Answer 1 through 4 below:

1) Please define Photographic Art....
Here is my definition--You want to blow up the picture in size--;
you want to frame it; folks besides family and friends like to look
at it; it has an interesting and important theme or principle to
it; it is quite unique; you might win the fair with it.

2) Give an example if you like:
Here is mine--I call it "A little girl dreams about being the big
girl"

http://pages.prodigy.net/rmcelheny/dolfin.htm

I used photoshop magic wand, dropper, bucket, etc to blue out the
background where lots of people mingling and one guy had a beer.

3) Suggest one of your favorite photo art gallerys--here is one of
mine:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/places/2001/20010920_local_safari.html

4) Comment politely on the nice folks that post their
comments/photos.
Let's not stir too much on this one like we did with "Predictions
on the Winners" But let's learn from each other on this. Photo
art is my hobby and I want to learn from forum friends!

Best regards,

MAC
http://www.mcelheny.cc

 

[William J Fleury]

Art is art, some art I like, some I do not. Just spent a hour here on this thread, reading and looking at photos and links, most of what I seen I think is art and is good work.

We all like shooting slightly different things, or should I say have differant things around us to shoot. I enjoyed the macro work of the butterflys and the spiders, I have not done much marco shooting. Seeing others work, and hearing they opinions, I think (in this thread) was both intresting and educational for me.
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_5786s
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_3023s
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_3985s
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_4758
WJF

Alright folks --let's have some fun. Answer 1 through 4 below:

1) Please define Photographic Art....
Here is my definition--You want to blow up the picture in size--;
you want to frame it; folks besides family and friends like to look
at it; it has an interesting and important theme or principle to
it; it is quite unique; you might win the fair with it.

2) Give an example if you like:
Here is mine--I call it "A little girl dreams about being the big
girl"

http://pages.prodigy.net/rmcelheny/dolfin.htm

I used photoshop magic wand, dropper, bucket, etc to blue out the
background where lots of people mingling and one guy had a beer.

3) Suggest one of your favorite photo art gallerys--here is one of
mine:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/places/2001/20010920_local_safari.html

4) Comment politely on the nice folks that post their
comments/photos.
Let's not stir too much on this one like we did with "Predictions
on the Winners" But let's learn from each other on this. Photo
art is my hobby and I want to learn from forum friends!

Best regards,

MAC
http://www.mcelheny.cc

 

[MAC]

"What we like to look at" is what art is all about. This thread does have some good art in it as you point out. Your crab particularly "grabbed me as good art". We're all contributing and learning here which is a good thing this forum should have.

Glad you spent the hour and thanks for your post.

Best regards,
MAC

Alright folks --let's have some fun. Answer 1 through 4 below:

1) Please define Photographic Art....
Here is my definition--You want to blow up the picture in size--;
you want to frame it; folks besides family and friends like to look
at it; it has an interesting and important theme or principle to
it; it is quite unique; you might win the fair with it.

2) Give an example if you like:
Here is mine--I call it "A little girl dreams about being the big
girl"

http://pages.prodigy.net/rmcelheny/dolfin.htm

I used photoshop magic wand, dropper, bucket, etc to blue out the
background where lots of people mingling and one guy had a beer.

3) Suggest one of your favorite photo art gallerys--here is one of
mine:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/places/2001/20010920_local_safari.html

4) Comment politely on the nice folks that post their
comments/photos.
Let's not stir too much on this one like we did with "Predictions
on the Winners" But let's learn from each other on this. Photo
art is my hobby and I want to learn from forum friends!

Best regards,

MAC
http://www.mcelheny.cc

 

[Ed (;¬ >)]

Larry, you are more of an optomist than I.

-Ed

Being an artist is a tuff life. Since masters didn't have a public
relations manager their works never did hit the prime time, that is
why a dead artist is more valuble since death heightens awareness.
But all great works are appreciated by the masses. Its the merit
that takes time to mature.
Larry

 

[Ed (;¬ >)]

Art is art, some art I like, some I do not. Just spent a hour here
on this thread, reading and looking at photos and links, most of
what I seen I think is art and is good work.
We all like shooting slightly different things, or should I say
have differant things around us to shoot. I enjoyed the macro work
of the butterflys and the spiders, I have not done much marco
shooting. Seeing others work, and hearing they opinions, I think
(in this thread) was both intresting and educational for me.
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_5786s
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_3023s
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_3985s
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_4758
WJF

Four facinating head shots, but not quite as facinating as the group.

Why these 4?

-Ed

 

[Ron Stanley]

Hi Ron, I just thought I would clarify my statement. I believe that all elements of good design, variation, reptition, contrast complement, proportion and subject matter originate in the mind of God. It is our humble attempt to use these elements when we create art. An aetheist may create art, but he may not have a complete understanding of what he is doing. Granted subject matter can be somewhat subjective. but I would say that art is that which reaches out to the higher aspects of our nature, love, compassion, beauty, sacrifice, honor. In a previous post the question was raised whether the famous picture of the little girl running during the Viet nam war would be art. I would say it is because it clearly reaches out to our compassion for the little girl, whereas a picture depicting cruelty for its own sake would not.

Ron S.

Some follow-on comments: It seems that there are 3 directions that
have been discussed:

1. The emotive force of the photograph.

2. The structural/geometric/technical angle.

3. The "mind of God" view.

I think it's interesting that the first two arose somewhat
independently. Clearly, they're both important but they also seem
to use very different language. It's interesting to think about
how to fuse these two views.

I found the third one to be somewhat puzzling. On the one hand, it
can't possibly be false since one is free to define one's personal
notion of God however one sees fit.

On the other hand, it would seem to suggest that atheists, for
example, cannot understand art except by having an accidental
understanding of what God is. Art produced by an atheist could
only be understood through the observer's projection of his notion
of God into the atheist's mindset which seems, at best, to be a
somewhat roundabout way of doing things and at worst somewhat
ethnocentric.

Ron Parr

 

[Ron Parr]

Hi Ron, I just thought I would clarify my statement. I believe
that all elements of good design, variation, reptition, contrast
complement, proportion and subject matter originate in the mind of
God. It is our humble attempt to use these elements when we
create art. An aetheist may create art, but he may not have a
complete understanding of what he is doing.

I find this comment to be extremely offensive.

Ron Parr

 

[William J Fleury]

Art is art, some art I like, some I do not. Just spent a hour here
on this thread, reading and looking at photos and links, most of
what I seen I think is art and is good work.
We all like shooting slightly different things, or should I say
have differant things around us to shoot. I enjoyed the macro work
of the butterflys and the spiders, I have not done much marco
shooting. Seeing others work, and hearing they opinions, I think
(in this thread) was both intresting and educational for me.
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_5786s
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_3023s
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_3985s
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/potd/Img_4758
WJF

Four facinating head shots, but not quite as facinating as the group.

Why these 4?

-Ed

I am not sure why I pick this photos, Just some stuff I had laying around the web.
Like Lighthouse?
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/LH/
WJF

 

[MAC]

Hi Ron, I just thought I would clarify my statement. I believe
that all elements of good design, variation, reptition, contrast
complement, proportion and subject matter originate in the mind of
God. It is our humble attempt to use these elements when we
create art. An aetheist may create art, but he may not have a
complete understanding of what he is doing.

I find this comment to be extremely offensive.

Ron Parr

Brother......

I started this thread and now look what has happened. I thought Ron S. was talking about "sick pics" and God's disdain for "sick pics" and not all this other stuff which doesn't even belong in another platform, let alone STF. I'm removing his input from the definition, being the thread starter and facilitator here. A phrase instead about "Art has a moral fiber to it" will suffice. The Atheists I know have moral fiber and understanding of art
Ron S.--wake up.

This new statement about moral fiber should satisfy those not previously buying the book.

Geesh--that will teach me to interpret someone elses words.

MAC

 

[MAC]

3) Suggest one of your favorite photo art gallerys--here is one of
mine:

This fellow is a unique photographic artist in my opinion:

http://www.riedyphoto.com/Bio.html

1) Becomes a fly on the wall
2) Doesn't do cheeze
3) Concentrates on the candid moments
4) Knows when to put the camera down
5) tells a story.

Some real good stuff here.

MAC

 

[Ed (;¬ >)]

Four facinating head shots, but not quite as facinating as the group.

Why these 4?

-Ed

I am not sure why I pick this photos, Just some stuff I had laying
around the web.
Like Lighthouse?
http://hohski.ohdrats.com/LH/
WJF

Quite a collection. I understand that without public support most lighthouses have disappeared.

-Ed

 

[Renee C. Popek]

Art is the mastery of understanding what is appealing to the
masses.

This is a refreshing viewpoint. Art snobs usually define art as
anything that can't be understood by the masses.

I am more inclined to the opinion that both are correct and
neither, necessarily, has the high road. Who (outside the cloister
of one's own soul) is to say that a Pepsi commercial that stirs
millions is somehow less artistic than a Dega which stirs only
thousands.

An artist is one who understands the science of what
triggers the appeal of the human visual brain.

What about Bach, Bethoven or Mozart?

To understand what
art is one must look in the past and study the masters.

But the masters never appealed to the masses.

Art is a
science of triggering emotion with forms. Some people are borned
with the ability to understand art as some are born to great
mathmaticians. But as in all forms of human creativity one must be
learned in the skills of art to heighten ones ability.

But are they skills? And can they be learned? Or is talent an
indefinable inate quality that can only be nurtured and refined?

Larry

-Ed

I would like to say that art, music and any of the other subjects that are often felt to require talent can be learned. I am an art teacher. I can teach all the elements of design and it can be understood by my students. Just as a math teacher can teach the elements of math and it can be understood. But not every student will become and artist nor every student become a mathematician. That does not mean we can't learn about it. Talent is not just reserved for the creative arts. There are talented people in computers, science, politics. These people are a minority and become famous or very good at what they do and at the top of their field. The rest of us may be artists, actors, computer scientists, bankers but we never acheive the heights that these small few do. Perhaps we yearn for notiriety or we are content to take jobs that use our talents. Or perhaps it becomes a hobby.

Art is an act of creation first for the artist and second for an audience. Sometimes a select audience. As an artist and an art teacher I don't set out to paint a painting that will be seen by everyone I set out to paint a painting because I have a drive to put down a message that's important to me. Often no one else see's it when it's done. I think I'm rambling but thats my two cents
Renee

 

[Renee C. Popek]

2. I just thought this would be neat. I made a duplicate layer of
the original and turned myself black and white. There was a man at
work who hated me and I hated him. One day when he walked by he
stopped and went crazy over this photo. I had to make him an 8x10.
He became a friend. Huh?



3. Then there is a hard core group who loves black and white
photography and considers it the true art form.



I guess my point is that I don't know when it is art until someone
tells me it is and then I will keep in mind that it is art to them
not to anyone else. Including me!
I don't really know of any gallerys that I frequent so I can't
really resond to that. I do however belive in the spirit of this
thread. No use being jerks when we can help each other and
ourselves in these forums.
Ron Warren

Alright folks --let's have some fun. Answer 1 through 4 below:

1) Please define Photographic Art....
Here is my definition--You want to blow up the picture in size--;
you want to frame it; folks besides family and friends like to look
at it; it has an interesting and important theme or principle to
it; it is quite unique; you might win the fair with it.

2) Give an example if you like:
Here is mine--I call it "A little girl dreams about being the big
girl"

http://pages.prodigy.net/rmcelheny/dolfin.htm

I used photoshop magic wand, dropper, bucket, etc to blue out the
background where lots of people mingling and one guy had a beer.

3) Suggest one of your favorite photo art gallerys--here is one of
mine:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/places/2001/20010920_local_safari.html

4) Comment politely on the nice folks that post their
comments/photos.
Let's not stir too much on this one like we did with "Predictions
on the Winners" But let's learn from each other on this. Photo
art is my hobby and I want to learn from forum friends!

Best regards,

MAC
http://www.mcelheny.cc

Really like the guitar picture.

Renee

 

[LMC54]

I think you said it nicely. Hard to say what one wants in a paragraph.
Larry

I would like to say that art, music and any of the other subjects
that are often felt to require talent can be learned. I am an art
teacher. I can teach all the elements of design and it can be
understood by my students. Just as a math teacher can teach the
elements of math and it can be understood. But not every student
will become and artist nor every student become a mathematician.
That does not mean we can't learn about it. Talent is not just
reserved for the creative arts. There are talented people in
computers, science, politics. These people are a minority and
become famous or very good at what they do and at the top of their
field. The rest of us may be artists, actors, computer scientists,
bankers but we never acheive the heights that these small few do.
Perhaps we yearn for notiriety or we are content to take jobs that
use our talents. Or perhaps it becomes a hobby.
Art is an act of creation first for the artist and second for an
audience. Sometimes a select audience. As an artist and an art
teacher I don't set out to paint a painting that will be seen by
everyone I set out to paint a painting because I have a drive to
put down a message that's important to me. Often no one else see's
it when it's done. I think I'm rambling but thats my two cents
Renee