DIGITAL is not ART !

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by DarkRoom ForEver, Oct 9, 2004.

  1. DarkRoom ForEver, Oct 9, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. DarkRoom ForEver

    imbsysop Guest

    "DarkRoom ForEver" <> wrote in message
    news:kfN9d.23903$...
    >
    > I'm not the only one thinking this...
    >
    > http://henrystop.port5.com
    >


    besides this being just flame bait .. Art being dependent on the
    (intermediate) equipment used is plain raving BS .. :)
    the end product is the only valid criterion, not the way to it..
    imbsysop, Oct 9, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. DarkRoom ForEver

    al-Farrob Guest

    DarkRoom ForEver wrote:

    >
    > I'm not the only one thinking this...
    >
    > http://henrystop.port5.com
    >
    > DarkRoom ForEver.


    Imho, the fast spreading of compact digital cameras will have the same evil
    effects on photo art as the spreading of ball-point pens had on
    literature:))

    --
    al-Farrob
    --
    "16 photographs by al-Farrob"
    http://www.al-farrob.com
    al-Farrob, Oct 9, 2004
    #3
  4. DarkRoom ForEver

    Bob Williams Guest

    DarkRoom ForEver wrote:
    > I'm not the only one thinking this...
    >
    > http://henrystop.port5.com
    >
    > DarkRoom ForEver.
    >
    >


    Henry Stop better embrace change or he will go the way of the dinosaur.
    It may already be too late.
    Apparently, he has not even advanced to Color Photography.
    Bob Williams
    Bob Williams, Oct 9, 2004
    #4
  5. "Bob Williams" <> wrote:
    > DarkRoom ForEver wrote:
    > > I'm not the only one thinking this...
    > >
    > > http://henrystop.port5.com
    > >

    >
    > Henry Stop better embrace change or he will go the way of the dinosaur.
    > It may already be too late.
    > Apparently, he has not even advanced to Color Photography.


    From the image on that page, it appears he hasn't even made it to black and
    white yet.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Oct 9, 2004
    #5
  6. DarkRoom ForEver

    Mark B. Guest

    "DarkRoom ForEver" <> wrote in message
    news:kfN9d.23903$...
    >
    > I'm not the only one thinking this...
    >
    > http://henrystop.port5.com
    >
    > DarkRoom ForEver.
    >
    >


    What you mean is, you're not the only troll here.
    Mark B., Oct 9, 2004
    #6
  7. "DarkRoom ForEver" <> wrote in message
    news:kfN9d.23903$...
    >
    > I'm not the only one thinking this...
    >
    > http://henrystop.port5.com
    >
    > DarkRoom ForEver.
    >


    An art troll...wow.

    Grant Wood said that photography is not art.

    HMc
    Howard McCollister, Oct 9, 2004
    #7
  8. DarkRoom ForEver

    Skip M Guest

    "Howard McCollister" <> wrote in message
    news:4167c8af$0$32242$...
    >
    > "DarkRoom ForEver" <> wrote in message
    > news:kfN9d.23903$...
    >>
    >> I'm not the only one thinking this...
    >>
    >> http://henrystop.port5.com
    >>
    >> DarkRoom ForEver.
    >>

    >
    > An art troll...wow.
    >
    > Grant Wood said that photography is not art.
    >
    > HMc
    >
    >
    >

    He wasn't the only one...

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
    Skip M, Oct 9, 2004
    #8
  9. Didn't they say in the 1800's and early 1900's that Photography wasn't art?
    The photographers were just a bunch of bad painters??? The same arguement
    arouse out of colour photography. His sample looks like a Holga image with
    the statement "Can you do this with a digital camera?" The image is soft,
    flat low contrast. It could easily be produced with a digital P&S, dSLR,
    Sigma SD* or a Holga...

    "DarkRoom ForEver" <> wrote in message
    news:kfN9d.23903$...
    >
    > I'm not the only one thinking this...
    >
    > http://henrystop.port5.com
    >
    > DarkRoom ForEver.
    >
    >
    ~Darrell Larose~, Oct 9, 2004
    #9
  10. DarkRoom ForEver

    Nostrobino Guest

    Very little photography, whether digital or chemistry-based, is art.

    Photography is photography. It doesn't have to pretend to be something it is
    not, and such pretense is important only to poseurs.

    N.
    Nostrobino, Oct 9, 2004
    #10
  11. "Nostrobino" <> wrote in
    news:GVQ9d.8056$:

    > Very little photography, whether digital or chemistry-based, is art.
    >
    > Photography is photography. It doesn't have to pretend to be something
    > it is not, and such pretense is important only to poseurs.


    Very litle is art IMHO. Oil on a canvas does not make art either.



    /Roland
    Roland Karlsson, Oct 9, 2004
    #11
  12. "Nostrobino" <> wrote in
    news:GVQ9d.8056$:

    > Very little photography, whether digital or chemistry-based, is art.


    Just do clearify - to me art is an artefact that moves me.
    Something that starts emotions and/or thoughts that I did
    not know was there. Thats the main thing. Of course - there
    also needs to be some kind of skill involved, either technical
    and/or creative.


    /Roland
    Roland Karlsson, Oct 9, 2004
    #12
  13. DarkRoom ForEver

    Nostrobino Guest

    "Roland Karlsson" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns957D959251E73klotjohan@130.133.1.4...
    > "Nostrobino" <> wrote in
    > news:GVQ9d.8056$:
    >
    >> Very little photography, whether digital or chemistry-based, is art.

    >
    > Just do clearify - to me art is an artefact that moves me.
    > Something that starts emotions and/or thoughts that I did
    > not know was there. Thats the main thing.


    Art does not require anything of that kind, though of course it is nice when
    it does that. There's a lot of art that doesn't move me in the least, but is
    still art.



    > Of course - there
    > also needs to be some kind of skill involved, either technical
    > and/or creative.


    It requires some kind of serious human effort. There doesn't have to be much
    if anything in the way of skill. When a kiddie in kindergarten makes a
    crayon drawing, it's art. The poorest art ever produced by the hand of man
    is still art.

    On the other hand, a photograph of some beautiful subject may "move you" but
    is not art because of that. If the subject existed in a form that we would
    regard as beautiful before the photo was taken, merely recording that
    subject is not by any stretch of the imagination a work of art.

    To call the successful recording of something by pressing a button "art" is
    both pretentious and foolish.

    N.
    Nostrobino, Oct 9, 2004
    #13
  14. DarkRoom ForEver

    Mick Brown Guest

    Yeah I seen his question under he picture "can you do this with digital" and
    I immediately thought, god I hope not!!



    "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    news:ck8gf3$2u9$...
    >
    > "Bob Williams" <> wrote:
    > > DarkRoom ForEver wrote:
    > > > I'm not the only one thinking this...
    > > >
    > > > http://henrystop.port5.com
    > > >

    > >
    > > Henry Stop better embrace change or he will go the way of the dinosaur.
    > > It may already be too late.
    > > Apparently, he has not even advanced to Color Photography.

    >
    > From the image on that page, it appears he hasn't even made it to black

    and
    > white yet.
    >
    > David J. Littleboy
    > Tokyo, Japan
    >
    >
    Mick Brown, Oct 9, 2004
    #14
  15. DarkRoom ForEver

    bob Guest

    "Nostrobino" <> wrote in
    news:TzR9d.8062$:

    > It requires some kind of serious human effort. There doesn't have to
    > be much if anything in the way of skill. When a kiddie in kindergarten
    > makes a crayon drawing, it's art. The poorest art ever produced by the
    > hand of man is still art.
    >


    Curiously, my dictionary says that art is "the conscious use of skill nad
    creative imagination esp. in the production of aesthetic objects."

    I think the kindergarten kid uses 100% of the skill he has in the
    production of his art. And in a very conscious and typically creative way,
    too.

    It's interesting that the definition that relates to aesthetic objects in
    fourth. The first three relate to acquired skills (The art of making
    friends, etc.)

    Bob

    --
    Delete the inverse SPAM to reply
    bob, Oct 9, 2004
    #15
  16. DarkRoom ForEver

    Guest

    In message <>,
    Bob Williams <> wrote:

    >Henry Stop better embrace change or he will go the way of the dinosaur.
    >It may already be too late.
    >Apparently, he has not even advanced to Color Photography.


    Is this guy really serious? The photo that says, "can you do this with
    digital" looks like crap, and nothing I can't do with digital. Even
    though Bayer cameras don't record exact, perfect greyscale at every
    pixel, an image shrunk that much is extremely accurate, as it contains
    many pixels' witness.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
    , Oct 9, 2004
    #16
  17. DarkRoom ForEver

    Nostrobino Guest

    "bob" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns957D633DE9F80bobatcarolnet@207.69.189.191...
    > "Nostrobino" <> wrote in
    > news:TzR9d.8062$:
    >
    >> It requires some kind of serious human effort. There doesn't have to
    >> be much if anything in the way of skill. When a kiddie in kindergarten
    >> makes a crayon drawing, it's art. The poorest art ever produced by the
    >> hand of man is still art.
    >>

    >
    > Curiously, my dictionary says that art is "the conscious use of skill nad
    > creative imagination esp. in the production of aesthetic objects."
    >
    > I think the kindergarten kid uses 100% of the skill he has in the
    > production of his art. And in a very conscious and typically creative way,
    > too.


    Exactly. The skill involved may be great or small, but art presumes that
    whatever skill and creativity exists, is used. The artist MAKES the thing,
    he doesn't merely record it. That's the important part. It's pretentious to
    say that one has created "art" simply by taking a pretty photo, but there
    are photographers who for some reason like to believe they have done exactly
    that.

    N.



    >
    > It's interesting that the definition that relates to aesthetic objects in
    > fourth. The first three relate to acquired skills (The art of making
    > friends, etc.)
    >
    > Bob
    >
    > --
    > Delete the inverse SPAM to reply
    Nostrobino, Oct 9, 2004
    #17
  18. "Nostrobino" <> writes:

    >> Curiously, my dictionary says that art is "the conscious use of skill nad
    >> creative imagination esp. in the production of aesthetic objects."


    >Exactly. The skill involved may be great or small, but art presumes that
    >whatever skill and creativity exists, is used. The artist MAKES the thing,
    >he doesn't merely record it. That's the important part. It's pretentious to
    >say that one has created "art" simply by taking a pretty photo, but there
    >are photographers who for some reason like to believe they have done exactly
    >that.


    That seems like a silly argument. The photographer *makes* the
    photograph, even if the camera is recording something that already
    exists. Landscape photographers don't "arrange" their subject, but the
    process of recording and then printing it involves many decisions about
    camera placement, lens focal length, cropping, exposure, tone and colour
    adjustments, and so on.

    Even if the photographer shoots on Auto and gets their prints from the
    local drugstore with no input into the processing, they are still
    deciding what subject to shoot, and under what lighting conditions.
    This can still involve skill and creativity, and it can still be art.

    Dave
    Dave Martindale, Oct 9, 2004
    #18
  19. DarkRoom ForEver

    Tony Guest

    DarkRoomForEver is not SMART.
    I think more people will agree with me than with you.
    If you rely on numbers to determine truth, you are in for a very sad life,
    Ace. Take a course in logic. I'm sure you can find one aimed at your nine
    year old mentality.

    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

    "DarkRoom ForEver" <> wrote in message
    news:kfN9d.23903$...
    >
    > I'm not the only one thinking this...
    >
    > http://henrystop.port5.com
    >
    > DarkRoom ForEver.
    >
    >
    Tony, Oct 9, 2004
    #19
  20. DarkRoom ForEver

    Tony Guest

    Then a MACK truck is art by your definition. Art is art - no matter
    whether you exist or not. I take the commercial view - anything purchased as
    art is art. This is nicely self serving as it makes me (de facto) an artist,
    since I've sold stuff as art. I'm sure that we can all come up with many
    many self serving definitions of art - but most of us would know they are
    self serving. Perhaps you should look into your definition further, Ace.

    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

    "Roland Karlsson" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns957D959251E73klotjohan@130.133.1.4...
    > "Nostrobino" <> wrote in
    > news:GVQ9d.8056$:
    >
    > > Very little photography, whether digital or chemistry-based, is art.

    >
    > Just do clearify - to me art is an artefact that moves me.
    > Something that starts emotions and/or thoughts that I did
    > not know was there. Thats the main thing. Of course - there
    > also needs to be some kind of skill involved, either technical
    > and/or creative.
    >
    >
    > /Roland
    Tony, Oct 9, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. arcade
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    410
    arcade
    Nov 30, 2006
  2. arcade
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    613
    Paul Heslop
    Nov 30, 2006
  3. Andrew Mowat
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    576
    Andrew Mowat
    Sep 14, 2004
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    380
  5. Rex Bruce
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    391
    Rex Bruce
    Feb 22, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page