| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/20/2006 08:15:57 AM · #1 |
Or at least, not according to my local council.
Those of you who read the thread about me putting together a book might remember that I was going to show it at an exhibition and try to sell prints and copies. Now I have been told by the even organisers that I am not allowed.
Why?
Because they only have a licence from the council to show & sell art. Not photography. I'm pretty annoyed at this, and perhaps a little insulted. I'm going to phone the council about it tomorrow, and hope they can give me an explaination and let me argue my case.
Anyway, just thought I'd post that to let off some steam. Grr!
Message edited by author 2006-07-20 08:16:26.
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 08:19:21 AM · #2 |
why not survey the community and bring a petition to them explaining people would be interested in seeing photography.
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 08:21:39 AM · #3 |
I was going to actually try that at the event if I fail in trying to get permission from the council. Or I could always just change the title of my book to "Ben Roberts - Really Realistic-Looking Paintings".
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 08:22:12 AM · #4 |
I had my first major exhibition set for 5 months time. This was booked a year ago. But the council ripped down all the council buildings including the art gallery. They are now building a beautiful two storey council building. Half of this building is their new art gallery with ceilings the height of the rest of the building. The art gallery will be open the same hours as the council building plus more. They do see photography as art and support it the same as art.
I live in a little country town with no traffic lights.
My point is...if an out in the sticks town can see photography as art...why can't other councils.
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 08:25:08 AM · #5 |
Oh no! It sounds like the event organizers have strictly interpreted the license; I'm sure the council will come 'round once you speak to them. Here's an article arguing that photography IS art that may help your discussion.
Good luck!
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 08:25:19 AM · #6 |
There has always been the arguement that for something to be considered art, the artist must come in contact with the art created. Not that I agree with this at all, but that has been the arguement.
This is more the case with digital photography since the photographer doesn't even print in a dark room environment where there is more of a relaitionship with the artist and the medium.
I would be interested to know if this council also disallows computer generated are, IE - graphic arts produced with vector art programs like Adobe Illustrator or Corel Draw. My guess is they will not allow this as well for the same reason.
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 08:29:07 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
There has always been the arguement that for something to be considered art, the artist must come in contact with the art created. Not that I agree with this at all, but that has been the arguement.
This is more the case with digital photography since the photographer doesn't even print in a dark room environment where there is more of a relaitionship with the artist and the medium.
I would be interested to know if this council also disallows computer generated are, IE - graphic arts produced with vector art programs like Adobe Illustrator or Corel Draw. My guess is they will not allow this as well for the same reason. |
I don't agree with this argument, but I can definately see where it's coming from. However, I used my Wacom tablet for a lot of the editing, so maybe that counts :P When I phone them tomorrow I will ask about the CGI stuff too, it's definately an interesting point.
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 08:59:32 AM · #8 |
The council and you have a semantic squabble about 'use of terms', apparently. Can you find examples of councils displaying photography in the name of art in the UK? Precedents and examples are probably going to work better than swapping opinions. Get the local rag to back you up on it.
Easy for me to say - good luck. |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 09:03:54 AM · #9 |
Stupid...
Not all photography is art, but it sure is an "ART" in my book...
if you paint wall and make living... you are a "painter"
if you paint portrait or scenery on a 12 X18 white board, you are an artist.
They both use paint to color a surface.
A photographer in a pharmacy takes passport photos of people, is not an artist... ALL people in DPC are artists.
S***t... made me angry this hour :(
(Calm down Leo.. caaaalm down *zip some coffee*)
Message edited by author 2006-07-20 09:04:46. |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 09:11:51 AM · #10 |
So the work of Ansel Adams is not art? Guess that means that all those bookstores will have to move his compilations to a different section of shelving.
It really is frustrating to deal with such shallow definitions, best of luck to you, Ben!
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 09:29:31 AM · #11 |
when i started to look for art organizations to assist in showning off my work i ran into the same problem - the ones close to my home - within 10k all were for " Visual Artists excluding photography " or similar .. so i ended up joining one that was +30km away that catered to all arts ..
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 09:34:38 AM · #12 |
That seems totally rediculous!!
I know of a lot of "Art" that isn't art either.
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 10:05:14 AM · #13 |
Sotheby's
If it's ok for Sotheby's it should be good enough for your council! |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 10:28:11 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by amber:
Sotheby's
If it's ok for Sotheby's it should be good enough for your council! |
Great find Kate!
As a bonus I now have a new base for pricing ;)
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 10:29:30 AM · #15 |
| Ben, the council's decision is stupid!! I hope you manage to present your case to them and get a different decision. Have they seen your work?? Sheesh - that's art!! |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 10:34:33 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by idnic:
Have they seen your work?? |
That's what I wanted to ask too. When I went to the gallery, the wonam there thougt photography wasn't art. Gave her my card and asked her to check out my site. She did, and now my first exhibition is done, and another one next year..
Her husband works on digital art and is very "known" in the business of other galeries. I think there's hope for you :)
Goodluck with your phonecall, hope you can make it happen!
|
|
|
|
07/20/2006 10:35:16 AM · #17 |
Ben, if you have any more trouble with the council, just send 'em our way...
*cracks knuckles* :)
Seriously, hope you manage to get through to them and that they can understand that photography can be every bit as artistic as painting or sculpting. Good luck to ya! |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 10:42:28 AM · #18 |
| I think we should send Art there (groan) for some good old-fashioned village burning. |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 10:46:47 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by BradP:
I think we should send Art there (groan) for some good old-fashioned village burning. |
Hahahahaaa that was terrible, Brad! :P |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 11:02:04 AM · #20 |
The Art Museum of Western Virginia (in Roanoke - 100,000 pop., railroad & more recently banking city) certainly recognizes photography as art. In fact they are gearing up for a large exhibition strictly of photography. It is an accredited art museum (not easy to accomplish these days). ALL of the art galleries in this area of southwestern Virginia (and I'm talking RURAL!) recognize good photography as art. I would definitley argue your case and cite examples of great art institutions and museums that recognize photography. Good luck!
(I'd be pissed too!) ;-) |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 11:09:16 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by alfresco:
Originally posted by amber:
Sotheby's
If it's ok for Sotheby's it should be good enough for your council! |
Great find Kate!
As a bonus I now have a new base for pricing ;) |
Can I afford you now?:) |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 11:29:53 AM · #22 |
I think some of the fundamentalist artists believe that a photograph is "captured" more than "created" and therefore not truly art. When they paint a canvas, they are creating something from nothing, but in their mind, when a person takes a photo they are simply capturing a moment.
Maybe some fail to realize the skill and talent beautiful photos like yours take to turn it from a simple capture to a work of art. You could just set your camera to green mode and snap a picture, or you could study the scene, carefully compose your shot, use a creative dof to single out your subject, wait for the right lighting/create your own, (etcetera, etcetera, etcetera) to truly make an ordinary picture look outstanding. This is sometimes evident when people say "Nice picture, you must have a really nice camera", not realizing all the steps you had to do to get everything just right to make it look much more than just a simple snapshot.
There are many different perceptions of what art is. I would take your work elsewhere, and show your work to people who can truly appreciate the art in photography. Their loss in my opinion. Good luck to you. |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 01:15:38 PM · #23 |
Ben, maybe you could talk to someone like Martin Edwards at the City of Bristol College. Martin runs the HNC and HND courses there and also exhibits his work in art galleries in Bristol. He's very approachable as well as being an excellent photographic artist. He might have some pointers for you...
//www.martinedwardsphotography.co.uk/index.html |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 01:49:14 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
There has always been the arguement that for something to be considered art, the artist must come in contact with the art created. Not that I agree with this at all, but that has been the arguement.
This is more the case with digital photography since the photographer doesn't even print in a dark room environment where there is more of a relaitionship with the artist and the medium.
I would be interested to know if this council also disallows computer generated are, IE - graphic arts produced with vector art programs like Adobe Illustrator or Corel Draw. My guess is they will not allow this as well for the same reason. |
So if Shakespear had used a word processor, his plays wouldn't be art? :-)
Many artists use digital mechanisms nowadays-composers, authors, poets, musicians, etc. Some artists use intermediate mechanisms to create thier art--a painter uses a brush, an author uses a pen, ... a photographer uses a camera, but in each case there's a lot of thought and effort. We know the creativity and effort it takes to think of a shot, set it up, get the lighting and camera settings right, but your council may be thinking "photography = snapshot".
IMO, the digital photographer may be more in contact with his medium than the film photographer because of post-processing. Is there really that much of a difference between using a brush to move paint around and using a mouse or graphics tablet pen to move electrons around?
Message edited by author 2006-07-20 13:49:47. |
|
|
|
07/20/2006 01:57:24 PM · #25 |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/24/2024 05:20:06 AM EDT.
