bobn2
Forum Pro
If you don't let the model smile it's 'fine art', if you do it's p**nography.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
What is "Fine art" photography??
- Thread starter pmgnut
- Start date
Do you think that your opinion about the abstract paintings in the Art Institute counts ?
Don
Quarkcharmed
Senior Member
Michael Firstlight
Veteran Member
I think there are really two different but compatible answers to this question.
The first answer is that fine art is whatever the creator or views say it is- it is primarily subjective. It could be one or only a few people's opinions - and everyone else thinks they are delusional, but to them, personally, it's fine art.
The second answer is when large populations agree something is fine art - not just one or a few people. How many? The greater the number, the more legitimate something is fine art, but that doesn't mean everyone has to agree that it's fine art, and the reverse is then true - to those that don't think so, it's not fine art.
How many people agreeing is enough? I'd say it's a sliding scale. Few would dispute Monet's paintings are fine art. In photography, the same is true of Weston and many others - huge populations say these works are fine art - so they end up on the high side of fine art legitimacy - and (usually) the monetary value follows the scale.
Now I personally think if I defecate in the woods and photograph it, the result is fine art. However, others might think it's cr@p.
--
The one thing everyone can agree on is that film photography has its negatives. It even has its positives and internegatives.
The first answer is that fine art is whatever the creator or views say it is- it is primarily subjective. It could be one or only a few people's opinions - and everyone else thinks they are delusional, but to them, personally, it's fine art.
The second answer is when large populations agree something is fine art - not just one or a few people. How many? The greater the number, the more legitimate something is fine art, but that doesn't mean everyone has to agree that it's fine art, and the reverse is then true - to those that don't think so, it's not fine art.
How many people agreeing is enough? I'd say it's a sliding scale. Few would dispute Monet's paintings are fine art. In photography, the same is true of Weston and many others - huge populations say these works are fine art - so they end up on the high side of fine art legitimacy - and (usually) the monetary value follows the scale.
Now I personally think if I defecate in the woods and photograph it, the result is fine art. However, others might think it's cr@p.
--
The one thing everyone can agree on is that film photography has its negatives. It even has its positives and internegatives.
Last edited:
Michael Firstlight
Veteran Member
Fine Art is a term used to describe artistic creations that are intended primarily for aesthetic or intellectual purposes, rather than functional or practical purposes. The term typically applies to works of visual art, such as painting, sculpture, drawing, and printmaking, that are created for their beauty, emotional impact, or intellectual stimulation, rather than for their utilitarian value. In general, Fine Art is characterized by its emphasis on creativity, skill, and originality, as well as its ability to evoke an emotional response or convey a message or idea. However, the definition of Fine Art is subjective and can vary depending on cultural and historical contexts, as well as individual opinions and tastes.
Sincerely,
ChatGPT
Sincerely,
ChatGPT
Tom Axford
Forum Pro
That would certainly apply to much amateur photography that is created largely because the photographer enjoys doing so and enjoys looking at the results and not for any functional or practical purpose.
It would also mean that probably most photography taken with phones is fine art.
Tom Axford
Forum Pro
SrMi
Veteran Member
I assume they would call Dorothea Lange's image of the migrant mother a "woke" picture. Also, Robert Frank's book "Americans" is what they would call a "woke" book today.
Guy Parsons
Forum Pro
No, that's simply fone art.
Jagganatha
Member
Such a good question!! I tag my stuff Fine Art because it is, but do I have valid reasons? Do I need them when I do this in the hope people looking for a certain CLASS of image will take a look. Ouch, Class, you'll say, Hmmm; but bear with me & I'll get to it.
Fine Art photography relates more to the way we "see" an image, than either to subject or situation in which it was made, but this applies as much to straight reportage as it does to Edward Weston's Pepper or to a George Gerski shopping mall picture, & what do I mean by this Blah Blah? Well, for me personally a "Fine Art" image has to transcend its subject matter in that it is more about giving the viewer a memorable visual experience, than the mere souvenir of one, and this is allied hopefully to a "craft" outlook and a pride in the RESULT of applied techniques rather than any interest in technique per se.
Once you realize this you can forget most modern famous photographers, because most, including many making large fortunes just dont cut it for me. Joni Mitchell & Nina Simone TRANSCEND their medium, but, Adele & Beyonce dont- they are POP, and Joni & Nina are ARTISTS. Like that.
If you have ever taught photography in an art college to young people (mostly!), as well as to an adult education evening class, you will know that this difference IS the result of how the student relates to photography. Kids want to make the best, most exciting images they can to match or surpass their role models. Adult amateurs are fixated on technique, and most completely miss the potential they have to do BETTER themselves as the kids do.
Fine Art photography relates more to the way we "see" an image, than either to subject or situation in which it was made, but this applies as much to straight reportage as it does to Edward Weston's Pepper or to a George Gerski shopping mall picture, & what do I mean by this Blah Blah? Well, for me personally a "Fine Art" image has to transcend its subject matter in that it is more about giving the viewer a memorable visual experience, than the mere souvenir of one, and this is allied hopefully to a "craft" outlook and a pride in the RESULT of applied techniques rather than any interest in technique per se.
Once you realize this you can forget most modern famous photographers, because most, including many making large fortunes just dont cut it for me. Joni Mitchell & Nina Simone TRANSCEND their medium, but, Adele & Beyonce dont- they are POP, and Joni & Nina are ARTISTS. Like that.
If you have ever taught photography in an art college to young people (mostly!), as well as to an adult education evening class, you will know that this difference IS the result of how the student relates to photography. Kids want to make the best, most exciting images they can to match or surpass their role models. Adult amateurs are fixated on technique, and most completely miss the potential they have to do BETTER themselves as the kids do.
Mackiesback
Forum Pro
To me fine art photography is the pictures I take at the museum.
Redhenry
Senior Member
This would probably depict a person with pronouns drinking fair trade coffee from a reusable cup, in a war zone, cuddling an endangered animal.
Guy Parsons
Forum Pro
From the appropriate Merriam-Webster dictionary on "woke"...
chiefly US slang
1 : aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)
Some years back I saw photos of what would be regarded as the ultimate woke T-Shirt that had the message "Land Rights for Gay Whales".
Last edited:
JohnSil
Senior Member
There are only two kinds of photography...., commercial and art.
Art is anything that is not commissioned for pay or hire.
Commercial is anything you've been paid to shoot.
You can call the art anything you want. Call it fine art, bad art, giclee, exhibition or collectible...., it's still art if it was NOT done for pay or hire.
John
Based on the snooty local art gallery it appears that fine art is synonymous with woke art. I just received the exhibition and lecture schedule for the next 6 months. Every single presentation and lecture is about art made by black artists. A guess the all white group that runs the gallery wants to be PC and support the cause and plight of black painters and photographers.
The lily whites running the show seem to have missed a major point. In this area the percentage of blacks is quite low. Instead there is a major and growing Hispanic population they seem to have forgotten about.
The lily whites running the show seem to have missed a major point. In this area the percentage of blacks is quite low. Instead there is a major and growing Hispanic population they seem to have forgotten about.
Much of the art in existence was commisioned by wealthy benefactors or the Catholic Church. One of Picasso's most well known works was Guernica, commissioned by the Spanish Republic.
JohnSil
Senior Member
Yes, that would be "commercial art". Do not confuse commercial with good or bad art. Art is just the way it starts out not how it ends up! Same for commercial.
John
Last edited:
Guy Parsons
Forum Pro
Oh wow, my years and years of pedestrian photography is really "art" just because nobody paid me.
RL Photography
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 436
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 402
The Stonecutters:
Similar threads
- Question
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum