Originally posted by séamuis but your comparison is not only apples to oranges but also just simply no good. the tools aren't relevant. so the 'tagger' in your first example is only a 'tagger' because he didn't take the time to create what you consider art, not because he couldn't or because he didn't have a wide selection of tools, but simply that he didn't. a real artist could create art with the very same limited tools you bash the tagger for. proving the tools are just as I said, irrelevant. or do you disagree? some artists prefer having wide selection of tools, some prefer to work with limited tools. this goes for photographers as well. Garry winogrand used leica exclusively for his "street" photography (he hated that term) and pretty much noting but moderate wide angles. 28 and 35 predominantly. would you consider him not a real "street" photographer by your ideals? because I'm sure he had a hell of a lot more skill behind the lens than you with one camera and one wide angle lens.
but going back to more traditional art. there are some artists who will only use one medium. one pencil or pen. one brush, one colour. etc, etc. and can have incredible talent, imagination and artistry. are they fake because they chose not to use many pencils pens, brushes, colours, mediums, etc? I would think not. so your argument falls apart rather quickly when you step back and take a real look at things.
like I said, drop your elitist know-it-all attitude, stop labeling people by equipment used or not used and worry about what really matters. the photos. what was used t get them makes no difference at all. none. and it has no bearing at all on wether you are 'real' or 'talented'. your ideals are thus ridiculous, immature and make no sense.
Once again I'm talking about street arts, obviously your prolly a farm boy or grew up somewhere with not so a high population... You can create any kind of art with just one tool no problem... But the streets is an organic object thats forever changing and moving, it's not a canvas stuck to the floor, its not a model in the studio with light shining on it... Your not capturing the full aspect of "street" art with one tool its not possible and it never will be possible, it's like going to war with one gun, one plane, one bomb... It's why backpacks sell very well in the city... Once again I want you to name a famous street photographer who was excepted by the common people and not by just photographers, I dont consider anybody famous unless I've seen him in a popular magazine or on a non photography based show... I'm not trying to present to photographers and thats the main thing with "street" arts, its to show the outside world who you are... You can sell a picture for a million dollars to a photography collector, but to someone outside your little photographer bubble it would make no sense because you captured a scene and not an image... Thats why there are no "real" famous photographers and all photographers are virtually unknown, theyre not walking down the street signing autographs, cause no photographer in the 20th century has captured it well enough to have people remember his name outside the community... Walk around town tell everyone who your favorite photographers are people will look at you like your crazy, people who hate fine art know who picasso is...
Last edited by wanderography; 03-09-2012 at 03:54 PM.