DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Is photography art!
Pages:  
Showing posts 76 - 87 of 87, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 10/07/2004 09:29:34 PM · #76
I am begining to see that the object must be separated from the consideration of what art is. If an artist works all night and comes up with a granola bar smashed on a crucifix, and said "wow - I'll call that granola christ" and i happen to wake up in the morning and find that a granola bar got smashed on the crucifix and say- "what a mess" It shows that art is relative.

But the question is ... does it depend on the art or the artist or the audience to make something art?

it is easy to say there is no answer but... perhaps art is defined by those looking back and saying... this is or isn't art. it is much more relative than you think.
 10/07/2004 10:04:12 PM · #77
Originally posted by blindjustice:
I am begining to see that the object must be separated from the consideration of what art is. If an artist works all night and comes up with a granola bar smashed on a crucifix, and said "wow - I'll call that granola christ" and i happen to wake up in the morning and find that a granola bar got smashed on the crucifix and say- "what a mess" It shows that art is relative.

But the question is ... does it depend on the art or the artist or the audience to make something art?

it is easy to say there is no answer but... perhaps art is defined by those looking back and saying... this is or isn't art. it is much more relative than you think.


This is the entire point. Art is completely subjective. I may think its art and you may not.

However, being able to recognize that something may be 'art' in someone else's eyes is also relevant.
 10/07/2004 10:08:20 PM · #78
Art is art not because it fits certain definitions (of which its maker has possibly never heard) or because it conforms to certain concepts, ideas or aesthetic notions generated before, after or as a latent result of its existence. It is art because of a certain eternal and irrepressible charge.

Since conductivity is required for a charge to go anywhere, it is reasonable to assume that its reach and distribution depends on both voltage and the specific properties of the conductors.
10/07/2004 10:13:18 PM · #79
Originally posted by zeuszen:


Since conductivity is required for a charge to go anywhere, it is reasonable to assume that its reach and distribution depends on both voltage and the specific properties of the conductors.


Would you say that the 'condutor' at DPC is made of porcelain? Or maybe the voltage is just very low... hmmm...

Message edited by author 2004-10-07 22:15:45.
 10/07/2004 10:17:44 PM · #80
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by zeuszen:


Since conductivity is required for a charge to go anywhere, it is reasonable to assume that its reach and distribution depends on both voltage and the specific properties of the conductors.


Would you say that the 'condutor' at DPC is made of porcelain?


I would, but you're here and so many others who electrify my own clay-like existence. :-(
10/07/2004 10:59:20 PM · #81
Art is subjective, for sure, but at the same time, it's universal. That's the esthetics in art. Unification (in the art object) of oppostites. while we may have our own understandings of the languages of art, at the same time there are certain commonalities we can identify...color, shape, texture, etc. That effective artist is able use the universal to talk with and to the personal.

Universal/personal, is just one kind of opposite pairs, but there are many and in evaluating art it may behoove us to identify which opposites are working in the creation. This is critique.

Message edited by author 2004-10-07 23:07:47.
 10/08/2004 12:36:20 AM · #82
Very interesting discussion!

My view is that photography CAN be art. Just as I can draw a stick figure (which is not art), some folks can take snapshots (which usually are not art). To me, photography comes in layers:

1. You can take a photo of an object or subject. This is not yet art.
2. You can take a photo of an object or subject with interesting light. This can be art, but not likely.
3. You can take a photo of an object or subject with interesting light and add an interpretation or point of view. This is usually art.

10/08/2004 05:26:37 AM · #83
Originally posted by blindjustice:
I am begining to see that the object must be separated from the consideration of what art is. If an artist works all night and comes up with a granola bar smashed on a crucifix, and said "wow - I'll call that granola christ" and i happen to wake up in the morning and find that a granola bar got smashed on the crucifix and say- "what a mess" It shows that art is relative.

But the question is ... does it depend on the art or the artist or the audience to make something art?

it is easy to say there is no answer but... perhaps art is defined by those looking back and saying... this is or isn't art. it is much more relative than you think.

I feel it depends on the effect created. Without the effect, there is nothing to make it art. It is about the completion of the creation-medium-impact sequence to cause the effect of being art.

The creator is working on realizing the intent of communicating something. If his creation is successful in creating the desired effect -- conveying the message -- it has fulfilled its purpose. If it affects someone strongly, they are likely to consider it art. Of course, the creator can also create something that fulfills the intention of communicating upon himself. This then would be art to the creator as well as any other audience.

Some say it is insanity to talk to yourself -- but I find it refreshing to have a conversation with someone that understands me fully.

:D

David
 10/08/2004 12:08:10 PM · #84
Originally posted by Britannica:
Some say it is insanity to talk to yourself -- but I find it refreshing to have a conversation with someone that understands me fully.


Now, did you steal this somewhere or did you earn it? ;-)
Lovely and sharp.
 10/08/2004 01:05:33 PM · #85
As I said initially when I posted this thread, photography seems to be viewed from a technical aspect first and artistic, or aesthetic, values come a poor second, possibly because of photography̢۪s technical and mechanical nature. It seems to suffer more from this than other forms of art. For me the point is who are we to judge. People are so quick to apply their own perceptions, technical or aesthetic, to someone else̢۪s creation. Just because it might not appeal to you on some level, doesn̢۪t automatically mean it's not going to have a profound impact on someone else, on a level you can't perceive. And because of that fact should be respected as art, regardless of your own opinion.
[/url]
 10/08/2004 01:50:08 PM · #86
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by Britannica:
Some say it is insanity to talk to yourself -- but I find it refreshing to have a conversation with someone that understands me fully.


Now, did you steal this somewhere or did you earn it? ;-)
Lovely and sharp.


It is original. ;)

David
 10/08/2004 02:19:37 PM · #87
Originally posted by Ptman:
As I said initially when I posted this thread, photography seems to be viewed from a technical aspect first and artistic, or aesthetic, values come a poor second, possibly because of photography̢۪s technical and mechanical nature. It seems to suffer more from this than other forms of art. For me the point is who are we to judge. People are so quick to apply their own perceptions, technical or aesthetic, to someone else̢۪s creation. Just because it might not appeal to you on some level, doesn̢۪t automatically mean it's not going to have a profound impact on someone else, on a level you can't perceive. And because of that fact should be respected as art, regardless of your own opinion.
[/url]


This appeals to me, both in tone and gist: a wholesome and practical stance toward the subject of this discussion.

Message edited by author 2004-10-08 14:21:02.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/30/2025 03:12:11 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/30/2025 03:12:11 PM EDT.