Where has the art gone - Page 2

**dtype38** · 11 Jul 2006, 15:33 (Ref:1653592)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaxs

I have often thought that if photography were difficult in the true sense of the term -- meaning that the creation of a simple photograph would entail as much time and effort as the production of a good watercolor or etching -- there would be a vast improvement in total output. The sheer ease with which we can produce a superficial image often leads to creative disaster.

Discuss:

So does that meant the street artist who produced an excellent watercolour of my daughter in about 12minutes wasn't talented and wasn't producing art?

Or perhaps it means that a photographer who spent hours wedged between some tyres and armco, in sweltering temperatures, manipulating lots of highly complex photography equipment, through changing lighting conditions, taking dozens of pics. Who then spent yet more time later on a computer screen rejecting the imperfect ones, and manipulating the best to produce a beautiful photo of a racing car in full flight..... was just taking a snapshot??

Dont think so

Jaxs · 11 Jul 2006, 20:53 (Ref:1653870)

Tee hee, who mention pretentiousness, wow…..

Does any one know who Ansel Adams is?

The fact a person lugs armfuls of equipment and sits behinds the Armco does nothing to qualify their work as art. The modern day digital camera takes away the necessary skills, reduces photography to its mean level. Point and shot, oh just set the camera to action and .. Wait, just adjust the colour sensitivity and let the chip do the work, quick inspection, no delete it…. The skill level is almost a minus factor. Self-focus, auto exposure set to sport mode… The huge number of photographs of racing cars that comply with the prerequisite tree quarter front view defies belief in originality. Art. Fart, shart..

Then upload to computer… skill, yer right… The reliance on somebody writing a program and allowing you the use of it does not qualify that work as art.

The photographer does not mix each individual colour before application, work endlessly to achieve a vision or comply with the basic rules of composition, and attend Art College to learn the basis of their profession. Just buy a digital camera and copy everyone else.

The repetition of images, the total lack of style or hallmark of the individual photographer completely undermines your argument of art, the originality, the freshness, the new and stunning image has been lost in a plethora of digital images trying to capture the technically perfect image…

It is a widely accepted fact that with the advent of digital cameras photographic art is dead. The value of ‘photographs’ by Avedon, Rodchenko, Karsh, Steichen etc have soared because the skill that’s now required to present a completed image requires the permission of the anonymous programmer without whom the camera operator is lost.

The street artist, look carefully at the next and the previous caricatures of other people, they will use a similar line for the cheeks, the shape of the lips, the lines around the eyes, even the ears conform… a cherished portrait, yes.. but art… Ohh No, The street artist is churning out portraits all day long and it requires very little thought to produce, if you get the chance, just stand and watch, the people and the drawings, look for the repetition of lines and the use of hair shape and colouring to quickly identify with the sitter. That’s almost like saying the photo booth print is a work of art

Now, you might not like modern art, you can call it any name you care to think of but as an individual your opinion as based on your ability to put forward a reasoned argument as to why you feel that does not meet the required elements to qualify as art.

The’ well, I don’t like it’ and ‘ I know what I like’ brigade, well, consider, this is a motor racing board, if you put forward the opinion that such and such is a terrible driver you are expected to qualify that remark. Why is it any different addressed to any other subject?

You may condemn the opinion of the ‘experts’ because you disagree with them, but does that make you right and them wrong, the education and level of expertise gives each individual a greater credibility but most of all a visual understanding and an open mind as to the intentions and ability of the artist creates a valued judgement.

I am beginning to believe that I stepped into a mutual appreciation society and the argument of art is just an ego polishing exercise amongst the clique.

Continue with the back slapping and hip hip hoorays but it’s not art.

The famous Star Trek saying, it’s Art, Jim, but not as we know it. Just about covers it.

Ian Sowman · 11 Jul 2006, 21:18 (Ref:1653895)

You're saying something here that nobody else has dreamed of saying. You have implied that every photograph constitutes art. Heck, there's lots of frankly very poor photography around if you're judging it on artistic merits. But equally there's some good stuff, just as there is some high quality art of a more 'traditional' kind.

Again, you're putting an equivalence between time and effort and artisitic merit, and it just isn't meaningful.

Owain Shaw · 11 Jul 2006, 21:51 (Ref:1653925)

I'm torn between the two. I can see both points of view, there is some truly great photography out there in every field but now more than ever it is getting lost amongst what just anyone can take.

With digital photography we have the perfect means for unlimited experimentation and embracing of imagination and creativity but, it seems to me that we use simply to take more of the same old shots.

redshoes · 11 Jul 2006, 21:55 (Ref:1653929)

Haven't we been here before?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaxs

The modern day digital camera takes away the necessary skills, reduces photography to its mean level. Point and shot, oh just set the camera to action and .. Wait, just adjust the colour sensitivity and let the chip do the work, quick inspection, no delete it…. The skill level is almost a minus factor.

I don't believe any is claiming that EVERY photograph qualifies as are. Just because cheap point-and-shoot cameras are more readily availble doesn't mean that SOME photography can't be consider art anymore than the mass availabllty of HB pencils or oil paints means that all drawings/painting are no longer art.

Quote:

Self-focus, auto exposure set to sport mode…

Both have been around long before the advent of digital camera. Just because they are available doesn't mean every photographer uses them

Quote:

The photographer does not mix each individual colour before application, work endlessly to achieve a vision or comply with the basic rules of composition

That was as true of film cameras as it is of digial, yet you seem to have no problem accepting the 'artistic' nature of earlier film photographers.

Quote:

It is a widely accepted fact that with the advent of digital cameras photographic art is dead. The value of ‘photographs’ by Avedon, Rodchenko, Karsh, Steichen etc have soared because the skill that’s now required to present a completed image requires the permission of the anonymous programmer without whom the camera operator is lost.

Photography is a more widely used medium, there's still art to be found, just need to look hard past the dross.

The computer program is simply a tool, it still takes skill to use properly. You don't simply press the magic 'give me some art' button. A painter uses a brush made by an anonymous factor worker but we don't dismiss his portrait because of that. It's the skill with which he uses that brush that matters.

Quote:

The street artist is churning out portraits all day long and it requires very little thought to produce

Never did Warhol any harm.

Quote:

I am beginning to believe that I stepped into a mutual appreciation society and the argument of art is just an ego polishing exercise amongst the clique.

Many would say the same about the so called 'art world'.

As Ian and others have said, what's the big hang up with the time taken to achieve something?

**Snapper Baz** · 11 Jul 2006, 22:37 (Ref:1653971)

I wish I had enough time on my hands to write endless amounts of tosh about the ins and outs on paintings and pictures..I used to paint as well, still have all my paint tubes and brushes somewhere...I guess the way they sit on the shelf in the loft is a work of art but to be honest I don't give damn either way

Ian Smith · 11 Jul 2006, 23:48 (Ref:1654024)

I think I will keep my mouth shut in future. Untill I have thought the question through. I will rephrase it.
Where have the PAINTINGS AND DRAWINGS GONE? would have been a better way to phrase it. sorry for any ruffled feathers I have caused.
I still admire a good photo as well as a well drawn picture.

**John Turner** · 12 Jul 2006, 07:22 (Ref:1654159)

No problems, Ian, it was good question, and I like certain paintings as well, particularly those relating to motorsport, and indeed we should see more of them. Unfortunately, there is one poster here who feels that he is the only one with an inside line to what constitutes art and that the rest of us are a bunch of philistines, so that we are deprived of having a pleasant discussion thread. He is also sailing very close to the wind in terms of breaching the rules about attacking the post not the poster.

Jaxs · 12 Jul 2006, 08:02 (Ref:1654181)

Mr turner,

I am more than wiling to dicuss your favourite painting, drawing , sketch etc

There is one poster here who feels that he is the only one with an inside line to what constitutes art and that the rest of us are a bunch of philistines, so that we are deprived of having a pleasant discussion thread.

Poster and post, Hmmm

Mr Sowman, you might like to clarify exectly where I have said every photograph etc etc..

But isn't photography all about time... ?

**dtype38** · 12 Jul 2006, 08:05 (Ref:1654184)

Yeh... but its still fun watching someone dig a hole for themselves.

Don't worry Jaxs, I like your point of view and think you argue it well. I don't agree with all of it, but that's not to say I don't have sympathy for many of the points you make. I think if maybe you just come down from defcon 5 for a while, you'd get more support

BTW my last post was attacking the content of the quote you posted, not you

Andrew Kitson · 12 Jul 2006, 08:29 (Ref:1654205)

Right, we are going to keep this discussion friendly or the thread will be closed.

Art is a very personal thing, you either like something or you don't. If it moves you, makes you stop and look or think about it, it is art. An Artefact in the dictonary is 'something made by human beings'. In the modern world that also means digital photographs or any computer graphics as the computer will not do it by itself.

If your interest is in traditional work like mine, modern renderings like andy_b's or photographs like many on this forum, please try and respect what other people are doing.

You don't have to look at it if you don't like it, no-one is forcing you to!
Same with music, another art form. If you don't like a song switch it off but respect the fact that others do.

**John Turner** · 12 Jul 2006, 08:56 (Ref:1654227)

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtype38

Don't worry Jaxs, I like your point of view and think you argue it well. I don't agree with all of it, but that's not to say I don't have sympathy for many of the points you make. I think if maybe you just come down from defcon 5 for a while, you'd get more support

Quite! No problem with the opinions, even though I disagree with them; more the manner in which they are expressed, and the description of some of the other posters posts.

EvilPumpkin · 12 Jul 2006, 11:03 (Ref:1654357)

One of the definitions of "art" from dictionary.com

"The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium. "

The Oxford English Dictionary says:
noun 1 the expression of creative skill through a visual medium such as painting or sculpture.

Ok it gives painting as an example but does not seem to feel that art is confined solely to it.

Jaxs, when are we going to see some demonstrations of your contributions to art? I'd be very interested to see some of your paintings?

Andrew Kitson · 12 Jul 2006, 12:05 (Ref:1654411)

Former F1 team boss Peter Connew with his Austrian GP painting, taken at his home in London. Thanks to Barry Boor for organising this.

**Snapper Baz** · 12 Jul 2006, 18:00 (Ref:1654672)

Exactly...lets get back to the original posting and perhaps see some nice pictures whether they be drawn, painted or photographed without an A4 essay on the merits of each one-for gods sake its a fun forum, not the Sunday Times!

andy_b · 12 Jul 2006, 20:18 (Ref:1654797)

agreed, i should have something else to add in the next few days

Jaxs · 12 Jul 2006, 21:11 (Ref:1654835)

Jaxs, when are we going to see some demonstrations of your contributions to art? I'd be very interested to see some of your paintings?

LOL, I would be on a hiding to nothing on that one... tee hee... Aunt sally and all that...

Art, to me .. firstly a word that you don't attribute to a regular every day visual image... lets qualify that, I am almost a regular visitor to tate modern. tate britain, national gallery, Royal acedemy etc... during the winter, on nodding terms with some of the staff.... very open minded but.. the casual use of the word to, what I would call, mundane, rankles...

Art is the master piece, the work of the true artisan, the master of his or her profession, with an ability to compile either a painting, photograph, music, sculpture,furniture that is the classic example of the profession. that cannot be copied easily, cannot be considered as trite or everyday and is original..

Ian Smith · 12 Jul 2006, 21:30 (Ref:1654865)

And all i wanted was some nice paintings to drool over. I have been lucky enough to create 2 great masterpieces in my life time. Mind you I had a great Partner in my wife. Between us we had 2 great daughters and they are my claims to fame.

**Snapper Baz** · 12 Jul 2006, 21:59 (Ref:1654900)

Ok then, lets have a change but still arty in my mind! WDW Orlando at night, hand held, 8th of a second shutter speed no flash.

Ian Smith · 13 Jul 2006, 12:06 (Ref:1655287)

wow baz what a stunning image.
I must admit the advent of digital photography has given me the chance to take loads of photos, Like the majority of amatuers most is dross, with an occasional decent shot, and a very rare exceptional one. I cherish these as they are like gold.

Piglet · 2 Aug 2006, 07:41 (Ref:1670627)

Ohh a good argument and I missed it!!

Without wishing to drag this along further. Take a look at Stefan's pictures http://www.pbase.com/smarjoram/lmclassic2006 (not just the Classic gallery) and tell me that photography is not an art form!

PaulCherry · 2 Aug 2006, 19:43 (Ref:1671390)

I'll second the quality of all Stefan's photos over the years. Even better now with a DSLR.

Jaxs · 4 Aug 2006, 07:16 (Ref:1672842)

tell me that photography is not an art form! OK, some photography is not an art form.

The style and catagory of Stefan's work comes under Photojournalism, usually called Reportage, very good record shots, captured the moment but to in trying determine or define them as art, I personally would be very reluctant to go that far.

The painting that Andrew Kitson is holding, let me ask a question, first, what are you looking at?, two, what could be done to improve it?. Does it capture the essence of the scene? how would you have captured the scene or change to suit your own tastes? , remembering you have artistic license, you can do what ever you like,

Are all these guys engaged in an art form?

Ian Sowman · 4 Aug 2006, 08:00 (Ref:1672874)

Time to bang our collective heads against a brick wall again.

Not all photography could be classified as art. Nobody is saying that it should be.

Some photography could be classified as art.

Ian Smith · 4 Aug 2006, 08:13 (Ref:1672885)

Well a first two Ians in agreement. Not all photographs can be classed as art, But not all Paintings can be classed as art, In my case, more a messy daubing of paint. I therefore propose we now close this thread with the understanding that One mans meat is another mans poison. thank you for all your posts and I have taken all your comments on board.