Is photography art?
what is art?
"the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power."
"The purpose of art is washing the dust of daily life off our souls."
Pablo Picasso
in this essay i plan to present an argument on how photography is and isn't art.
Photography, in my opinion is and isn't art because in a way with photography you can just take a photo and edit it and class it as art. Now a days you could use Photoshop and add a few effects and merge some photos and class it as art because you made it yourself and it cant be copied so in that way it is classed as art.
In another way its not art because you could just go out and capture an image and someone else could have the same image and edit in the same way as you.
With paintings they will never be the same because of the way it has been drawn or painted, but also with photography you could recreate an image say by painting or modelling it and photograph it then that way it could be art. Because say if you had a model and you done a photo shoot with them and they didn't let no one else photograph them then if your the only one who has that image then it is art because you made that image by editing or making the model look how you want.
"Andy Warhol was a successful magazine and ad illustrator who became a leading artist of the 1960s Pop art movements. He ventured into a wide variety of art forms, including performance art, film making, video installations and writing, and controversially blurred the lines between fine art and mainstream aesthetics. Warhol died on February 22, 1987, in New York City" .Andy Warhol takes photographs then makes them into art by adding different effects and making them look painted and such which is classed as art but it started as a photograph.
with photography its art in a way because the way the naked eye sees things is different to how camera lenses see things because you could make things darker or lighter with a camera lens and it is never the way the naked eye sees it. You could also edit it and add different colours and that way if someone went to that location they could copy that image without using technology to do so.
it is also art because say if you took an image and edited something into it that is art because that's not how the real thing is or how people see things and also if you done a photo shoot in a studio and for instance say have a person thinking and have thought bubbles coming out of their head then that's are because that's something you cant actually see and with technology now a days and photography you can create things like that.
You can create things that you cant see by the naked eye so that is art. It also isn't art because someone could also draw or paint what they think or see and that is art as well but also art is what people create by sculpting or creating and if you recreate something and photograph it that is classed as art because you created it by hand or without using a camera that photographed it.
Also photography is and isn't art because the first ever photograph was in "remote antiquity with the discovery of the principle of the camera obscura and the observation that some substances are visibly altered by exposure to light.
As far as is known, nobody thought of bringing these two phenomena together to capture camera images in permanent form until around 1800, when Thomas Wedgwood made the first reliably documented although unsuccessful attempt. In the mid-1820s, Nicéphore Niépce succeeded, but several days of exposure in the camera were required and the earliest results were very crude. Niépce's associate Louis Daguerre went on to develop the daguerreotype process, the first publicly announced photographic process, which required only minutes of exposure in the camera and produced clear, finely detailed results. It was commercially introduced in 1839, a date generally accepted as the birth year of practical photography"
in the 1503-1517 the famous Mona Lisa was painted by Leonardo da Vinci and back then it was found to be a vary famous valuable painting and was put up in the Louvre Museum and this painting was very famous and there couldn't be another one like it to replace it where as with photography it isn't the same because famous photographs don't have as much value as paintings because with paintings you get all the original paint and type of feeling of the painting but with paintings if they go missing or get destroyed there's nothing you can do and its gone because you couldn't make one the same but if a painting was to go missing or get stolen like the Mona Lisa did it would be a serious crime but whereas if a photograph got stolen it wouldn't be as such as a big crime because if it gets destroyed or something you could
easily re take or re print the image off again, with the first ever
portrait photograph that was more valuable then a normal
photography
because although that one was still a photograph and classed as
photography it was painted so kind of have more value.
With photography its no just another piece of equipment making
the photograph its the person behind the camera because they are
the ones who have to set the exposure and ISO and so on, the
camera is just the equipment that takes the photograph of the
person. Behind the camera is the one who plans and creates up that
kind of image by choosing the angle and lighting and stuff.
Sometimes photography isn't art because you could just go out and
take an image and be lucky first time and have a really good image
but to me, photography is only art if you have worked at it and
actually spent some time and put effort into making it. Art not just
taking the image on for example say a phone and class it as art, if
people do that then that should be classed as effortless art and not
proper dedicated hard worked at art, to plan a photograph to
actually class it as art you have to organize everything before the
photograph. the kind of planning you need is to plan who your going to take the image of, make sure you know what camera settings you need, the location where your going to take the pictures.
for instance like who will feature in the photograph or
what kind of photograph it will be. Sometimes effortless art
actually is art as well because the
iconic image of Marilyn Monroe was not
planned and happened by accident which someone captured
but now has turned out to be an iconic successful image and is art.
“The best images are the ones that retain their strength and impact over the years, regardless of the number of times they are viewed.”
Photography also isn't art because with photography its kind of hard of say weather it is art or not because photographers and artists used to work side by side. With art such as painting or drawing it takes time to do and practice and with photography in a way its all automatic and all you have to do is press a button, learn a few techniques and done, photography is quite easy and possible for almost everyone to do.
In my opinion though photography is art but only if you dedicate your time and hard work into it such as editing the image or making it to its best quality not just taking a picture then done.
so in my opinion photography is art but the photography that is
painted is more valuable than photographs you could just print of
because they cant exactly be re painted or such that easily and
people appreciate them more if time is taken into doing the image.
Tilly O'Dell
In another way its not art because you could just go out and capture an image and someone else could have the same image and edit in the same way as you.
With paintings they will never be the same because of the way it has been drawn or painted, but also with photography you could recreate an image say by painting or modelling it and photograph it then that way it could be art. Because say if you had a model and you done a photo shoot with them and they didn't let no one else photograph them then if your the only one who has that image then it is art because you made that image by editing or making the model look how you want.
"Andy Warhol was a successful magazine and ad illustrator who became a leading artist of the 1960s Pop art movements. He ventured into a wide variety of art forms, including performance art, film making, video installations and writing, and controversially blurred the lines between fine art and mainstream aesthetics. Warhol died on February 22, 1987, in New York City" .Andy Warhol takes photographs then makes them into art by adding different effects and making them look painted and such which is classed as art but it started as a photograph.
with photography its art in a way because the way the naked eye sees things is different to how camera lenses see things because you could make things darker or lighter with a camera lens and it is never the way the naked eye sees it. You could also edit it and add different colours and that way if someone went to that location they could copy that image without using technology to do so.
it is also art because say if you took an image and edited something into it that is art because that's not how the real thing is or how people see things and also if you done a photo shoot in a studio and for instance say have a person thinking and have thought bubbles coming out of their head then that's are because that's something you cant actually see and with technology now a days and photography you can create things like that.
 |
| example |
You can create things that you cant see by the naked eye so that is art. It also isn't art because someone could also draw or paint what they think or see and that is art as well but also art is what people create by sculpting or creating and if you recreate something and photograph it that is classed as art because you created it by hand or without using a camera that photographed it.
Also photography is and isn't art because the first ever photograph was in "remote antiquity with the discovery of the principle of the camera obscura and the observation that some substances are visibly altered by exposure to light.
As far as is known, nobody thought of bringing these two phenomena together to capture camera images in permanent form until around 1800, when Thomas Wedgwood made the first reliably documented although unsuccessful attempt. In the mid-1820s, Nicéphore Niépce succeeded, but several days of exposure in the camera were required and the earliest results were very crude. Niépce's associate Louis Daguerre went on to develop the daguerreotype process, the first publicly announced photographic process, which required only minutes of exposure in the camera and produced clear, finely detailed results. It was commercially introduced in 1839, a date generally accepted as the birth year of practical photography"
in the 1503-1517 the famous Mona Lisa was painted by Leonardo da Vinci and back then it was found to be a vary famous valuable painting and was put up in the Louvre Museum and this painting was very famous and there couldn't be another one like it to replace it where as with photography it isn't the same because famous photographs don't have as much value as paintings because with paintings you get all the original paint and type of feeling of the painting but with paintings if they go missing or get destroyed there's nothing you can do and its gone because you couldn't make one the same but if a painting was to go missing or get stolen like the Mona Lisa did it would be a serious crime but whereas if a photograph got stolen it wouldn't be as such as a big crime because if it gets destroyed or something you could
easily re take or re print the image off again, with the first ever
portrait photograph that was more valuable then a normal
photography
because although that one was still a photograph and classed as
photography it was painted so kind of have more value.
With photography its no just another piece of equipment making
the photograph its the person behind the camera because they are
the ones who have to set the exposure and ISO and so on, the
camera is just the equipment that takes the photograph of the
person. Behind the camera is the one who plans and creates up that
kind of image by choosing the angle and lighting and stuff.
Sometimes photography isn't art because you could just go out and
take an image and be lucky first time and have a really good image
but to me, photography is only art if you have worked at it and
actually spent some time and put effort into making it. Art not just
taking the image on for example say a phone and class it as art, if
people do that then that should be classed as effortless art and not
proper dedicated hard worked at art, to plan a photograph to
actually class it as art you have to organize everything before the
photograph. the kind of planning you need is to plan who your going to take the image of, make sure you know what camera settings you need, the location where your going to take the pictures.
for instance like who will feature in the photograph or
what kind of photograph it will be. Sometimes effortless art
actually is art as well because the
iconic image of Marilyn Monroe was not
planned and happened by accident which someone captured
but now has turned out to be an iconic successful image and is art.
“The best images are the ones that retain their strength and impact over the years, regardless of the number of times they are viewed.”
Anne Geddes
 |
| this is the famous image of Marilyn Monroe |
 |
| This is an example of art that has been photo shopped |
Photography also isn't art because with photography its kind of hard of say weather it is art or not because photographers and artists used to work side by side. With art such as painting or drawing it takes time to do and practice and with photography in a way its all automatic and all you have to do is press a button, learn a few techniques and done, photography is quite easy and possible for almost everyone to do.
In my opinion though photography is art but only if you dedicate your time and hard work into it such as editing the image or making it to its best quality not just taking a picture then done.
so in my opinion photography is art but the photography that is
painted is more valuable than photographs you could just print of
because they cant exactly be re painted or such that easily and
people appreciate them more if time is taken into doing the image.
Tilly O'Dell
No comments:
Post a Comment