is photography art be honest

Replies

A

Anon09/12/26, 05:50No.4527332

Artists are given a thin chance to prove themselves. If they cannot pass, they move to photography to cope. If photography was accessible and affordable in Hitler's time, maybe he would not have committed the atrocities he did.

1

A

Anon09/12/26, 05:53No.4527333

Camera operation is not an art in the classical sense. The camera is a tool to produce an image. The image produced by a camera can absolutely be a form of visual media. This is especially true if you were to produce a physical print from the negative. If I drew/painted someone's portrait so well that it was completely indistinguishable from a photograph would that be considered art or no?

1

A

Anon09/12/26, 06:06No.4527336

It's a middle artNever high Sometimes low

3

A

Anon09/12/26, 08:28No.4527355

tricky one. you're not truly creating anything, just capturing things already in existence. but there is definitely a requirement of skill, involvement of personal twist/style etc which all result in a photo providing the same visual pleasure that a painting provides for example.

2

A

Anon09/12/26, 13:23No.4527378

I'll biteLargely the question of whether photography or anything else is art is a debate for people who don't actually practice photography. It only seeks to rank images from a viewers perspective as a substitute to actual culture.For example, this anon ranks artworks based on which media is used, regardless of the artworks themselves. This cannot be done out of actual interest for art, since if ever we were to make paintings pass for photograph, someone using this logic would disregard the art in favor of his ranking system.

1

A

Anon09/12/26, 13:55No.4527382

>is something X? >never give a definition for X Kind of makes all the discussion pointless

1

A

Anon09/12/26, 14:12No.4527388

I'll just quote myself: photography can be art but it doesn't have to. Intent matters and a monkey with a CCTV camera isn't an artist even if some frames captured along the way are interesting to look at. Winogrand is an example of non-art photography for the most part. He had some art pictures where he was obviously directing, but for the most part he did the photographic equivalent of dumpster diving and then showing some "gems" he found along the way (only well regarded by (((critics))) because of the lore surrounding them)

0

A

Anon09/12/26, 15:12No.4527397

>4527388 nophoto yapping >/pol/ user gets drunk >lands on /p/ many such cases sad

0

A

Anon09/12/26, 15:23No.4527400

>ITT Americans who suffered an India-tier school system that did not teach them to differentiate between 'objective' and 'subjective', opinion or fact... It's funny to share little gems like this thread with my friends from other countries that have career paths other than slave or mcdonalds. Look at you all, trying to define art and seperate it into tiers as if you're not just pissing into the wind... as if you will change even one mind... as if you, the amazon worker from south dakota will be the man that finally brings an objective definition to art. Retardation must be really endless sisyphean suffering, I pity you.

4

A

Anon09/12/26, 16:00No.4527411

0

A

Anon09/12/26, 16:28No.4527421

>the obtuse cuckold is still getting btfo in 2026 lmao

0

A

Anon09/12/26, 22:51No.4527504

If the "establishment" hangs it on a wall in a gallery, it's art. Art is what The State determines through training and legitimizing in an academy setting. This applies to those producing "art" or using their "trained" skills to determine what "is" art. Everyone just eats scraps off their table.

1

A

Anon09/13/26, 01:29No.4527537

Art is the communication of another persons perception.

2

A

Anon09/13/26, 19:22No.4527676

Photography is art, but not everything captured with a camera is photography.

1

A

Anon09/13/26, 22:17No.4527703

Yes but not all art is equal. Major arts require an initiation and training at a young age, the rest doesn't. Guess where photography lies.

0

A

Anon09/15/26, 08:22No.4527953

Photographs can be art but not all photographs are art by default. Same with paintings, video games, sculptures etc.

1

A

Anon09/15/26, 17:02No.4528011

>I left a snarky remark on this guy's post and he block me What was he expecting?

0

A

Anon09/16/26, 20:47No.4528244

Film photography can be art. Digital photography is never art. All art requires limitations. The modern digital camera is without limitations.

3

A

Anon09/17/26, 15:09No.4528390

Photography is documentation, not art

1

A

Anon09/18/26, 01:18No.4528475

Are you asking me for my opinion on this, or yours?

0

A

Anon09/19/26, 17:52No.4528945

That is an extremely narrow definition of art, and sadly this person isn’t the one to establish that definition. Nobody knows what art is, but people will fight tooth and nail nail to say their medium IS art and someone else’s ISNT in order to legitimize their own outputs. We all should know by now that a signed toilet is just as much art as a Rembrandt.

1

A

Anon09/19/26, 18:27No.4528967

it's photography

0

A

Anon09/19/26, 19:33No.4529012

Somehow you've made an even stupider post than the "photography is just reproduction" so it cant be an art post. Really fantastic job bro.Now go ahead and please enlighten us all about how a hobby cannot be art.

0

A

Anon09/23/26, 17:46No.4530028

YES

1

A

Anon10/28/26, 12:06No.4536920

Art is Beauty, so...When you see something ugly, you're not forced to consider it art, even if other people call it art.

3

A

Anon10/28/26, 19:03No.4537029

Art? Definitely. Fine-art? There's a Wikipedia article of fine-art photography, so I suppose

0