Photographers: Take Notice
Posted on: May 11, 20108 Comments |
As a photographer, you are not an artist. As a photographer, you are merely documenting life and other peoples works of art. As a photographer, you do not create art, you do not create anything, you simply take pictures of what others have created, including God’s creations. Photographers, you are not artists because you do not create. It’s best to think of yourselves more of a historian, just documenting what has already been done.
I’d like you to stop here, go back, read that paragraph above one more time, this time think about it as you read each sentence. Go ahead, I’ll wait… Now, let me break it down for you, see if I can make the insult clear.
The act of photographing something is not the act of creating something. Thus, it is not art!
How does that sentence above sit with you? You’re all photographers, tell me, what does it say about you and all that you’ve tried to do with your camera? Sure, some of you may not consider yourselves artists, but I’ll bet that some of you do. Some of you even like to think of photography as art, I mean don’t they have galleries and hang big impressive looking photographs in museums?
Why don’t we take another look at this. I’ll give you a few examples.
Example 1
Let’s imagine for a second a true artist. A man, he takes three people, three bodies and poses them into position. Then, said artist uses paint and brushes to decorate these three bodies, he spends time toiling over the details, uses fine brush strokes. He transforms the once three bodies into, umm, let’s say a Walrus. When finished, the three bodies, after hours of work, represent a Walrus. Yup, look just like the real thing. Three people all posed and painted, now look like a real life Walrus. This man, no… this artist, has created something. He has taken things and created something from them.
Once all is said and done, lights are set up, a backdrop put in place, a camera comes out, and a picture is taken. This picture is not the art, it’s just a way to document the event, the creation of real art. The picture itself is not the art, it isn’t considered the art.
Example 2
Let’s think of another scenario, this time let’s imagine an architect. This architect spends a year designing a building. He spends hours going over equations, figuring out the materials needed to build his structure. Once the design is complete a team of people get together, gather the required stone and metals. It takes years to build the designed building (or monument) until it is finally complete, done for the world to see, to occupy, to use. It’s a beautiful building, and in time a national treasure, a true work of art.
A photographer comes along set’s up some lights, waits for the right time of day, the perfect sky. He sits there for hours waiting for the right moment until the time comes to click the shutter button. Finally, CLICK! The images is edited, printed, and then sold to thousands of people. This photographer didn’t design the building, he didn’t build it, he didn’t create the sky, all he did was take a picture of it.
Example 3
A well known photographer sits on a hill overlooking a beautiful pasture. A stream quietly rolls along in the foreground while a majestic lake sits in front of towering, snow peaked mountains. Tall, green trees surround the scene, wrapping it in beauty beyond words. The sun is low in the sky creating a golden glow to the landscape and the clouds lay out across deep blue sky like a blanket.
After hours of waiting for the scene to unfold, for the light to be perfect, the photographer makes a few final adjustments to her camera. Finally, after scoping out the location for weeks, waiting for the right weather conditions, after carrying her monster large format camera to the spot… finally, she presses the shutter release. CLICK!
Later, she develops the negative, she makes a print. She reprints the image over and over, dodging and burning here and there to create the perfectly exposed image, she is satisfied. She has a print she is proud of, she shares it with the world, it’s printed in a book, the book is sold to thousands of people, she wins an award.
All the while, some will say that she isn’t an artist. She didn’t create the scene, some will say God created it, some will say it was a product of evolution, no matter… she just documented a place in time.
Have I said enough? Do you get where I am going?
Photographers Are Not Artists
All the above stems from an actual conversation I had with another photographer last week. He argued, yes a photographer argued, that as photographers we do not create art. We just take pictures of it.
Here’s where I call bullshit! Photography is art. Sure, not all of it, not every picture taken could be considered art. In fact I’d even go as far as to say that 99.9% of the pictures taken are not art, but some of it is. There are thousands of photos uploaded to Flickr in a minute, and thousands more being taken at this exact second. Think of it, all around the world there are thousands of pictures being taken at this exact moment. While most are not what some would call “art”, there are surly masterpieces out there. True works of art.
Rather than go into my thoughts on the subject I’ll leave it up to you. There’s a comment box below, let us know what you think. Is photography art?
Categories
Recent Comments
- Maria on Letting Go – Part Two
- Maite on Letting Go – Part Two
- macy on Letting Go – Part Two
- angela on Letting Go – Part Two
- Mandy (marandabrooke) on The Amazing Misadventures of a So-Called Wedding Photographer
- rae on Letting Go
- Joseph Richardson on The Amazing Misadventures of a So-Called Wedding Photographer
- C-Towner on The Amazing Misadventures of a So-Called Wedding Photographer
- angelamarie on The Amazing Misadventures of a So-Called Wedding Photographer
- Martin on The Amazing Misadventures of a So-Called Wedding Photographer


May 11th, 2010 at 11:54 am
Hell yes Photography is art! It takes a photographe. The skill, knowledge, eye, inspiration, and creativity to “document” or “capture” a moment that others would want hanging in their home. Owning a camera does not make you a photographer, just as owning a guitar doesn’t make you a musician. But taking the time and care to learn a skill does give you the right to consider yourself as such. And you can create anything you wish and if you consider it art, I think that’s all that matters.
May 11th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
Frankly, if someone is that stupid I would find it a waste to argue with them. It’s like someone who says we didn’t land on the moon, the world is flat, or Brad is handsome. You know, idiots.
May 11th, 2010 at 2:33 pm
The moment you press the shutter it becomes art in one form or another. Sure there are different levels of what might be considered true art, but that is the same for any art form.
Some people think a white canvas with a stroke of red paint is art, is it? Sure is, but then so are the van Gogh classics. What art is itself is debatable.
Photographers are as much artists and musicians, painters, writers etc.
Art on my MacBook Pro’s dictionary
“…the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination…”
Sounds like photography to me.
May 11th, 2010 at 3:17 pm
Danial… MacBooks are just smart. Great definition. Eh?
May 13th, 2010 at 4:28 am
Firstly: I am so glad to see another great article here – I was starting to get serious withdrawal.
Secondly: Photography is just a medium, in the same way that canvas and a brush are. Neither is art without creative input from the artist. Sounds like he/she was trolling you Brian.
What I find far more interesting is the way that photography (before post-processing) is actually a reversal of conventional art like painting and sculpture. For us the manipulation and creativity is in the setup of the scene (specially for artificial light photography) the camera just captures the light that’s there, but the DOF, light angles and ratios, composition are all chosen before the click.
Ironically, conventional art, the creative process happens WithinTheClick, which is extended from a moment to an extended period wherein the artist interprets and creates the scene.
Another interesting spin off to your troll’s argument is that almost all pop musicians can’t call themselves artists, because they don’t write their own songs. Likewise as a painting / sculpture becomes more lifelike it becomes less of an artwork, and more of an historical record.
May 14th, 2010 at 3:00 am
Whoever made this statement must hate Duchamp and others from the Dada movements.
Photography is not simply capturing what is already there, it is selecting just the right moment to capture, from the right angle, under the right level of light with there right settings of film, camera, development and post processing.
You can take a scientific approach, but that would be like tuning middle “C” on a piano to exactly 440Hz. Technically correct but very cold compared to the warm sound of a grand piano that’s slightly off perfect and layered with rich harmonics.
Photography can certainly be documentary, but equally artistic, depending upon the bent of the photographer.
May 15th, 2010 at 9:34 pm
A painter just takes pigments and smears them around on a canvas. A writer only takes the same old letters and words and arranges them in different ways. A guitarist only plucks the strings of an instrument to create sounds.
Sure, we can break something down to its base components and make it seem mundane. It isn’t. It is art because we can take a photograph of an everyday scene and show it to a hundred people and get a hundred different reactions. A photo can evoke emotion from its viewer, and it can also allow all the people in the world to see something that was previously only seen by one person: the photographer, the artist.
Being a photographer doesn’t make you an artist, but it also doesn’t give you a right to say the rest of us are not.
May 19th, 2010 at 3:58 pm
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So is art. The definition is as individual as one person can be. One thing I can say is that I will never allow someone to tell me that much of the work I do is not art. Is every shot I take a piece of art? I am trying, but no, I don’t have the hubris to suggest that. But then again, not every painting that Picasso created ever made it out of his studio. Even when “documenting” an event, a sunset, or anything at all, the photographer still has to do a fair bit of work to get things a certain way.
To say that we are just glorified documentarians is a bit extremist. (and have you ever met an extremist who had a flexible viewpoint?) It is a terribly short-sighted perspective, and ultimately a very limiting one.