[mattb123]

I have an art degree, so I feel like I need to comment on this thread. I mention my degree not to impress, but to bring up my familiarity and immersion with art. I consider myself an artist, but my career is as an engineer.

To me something becomes art when it's greater than the sum of it's parts. If it's a photo of a person, it needs to do more than just express that this is a person. That something more can be the situation the person is in or what they are feeling. It can be how the world reacts to this person or even how the light illuminates their hair, face, or body to create illusion or remind us of something else. The craft part is just the technical details that enable the piece to be recognizable, or fit what the photographer had in mind. It's a very gray line and there's tons of crossover between art, craft, and documentary.

I was a painter when I got my degree. I used photography for reference for paintings, but for me the photo part of the process was more craft at that point. When I started being able to express something or catch something that made the photo more than a way to document a scene, I felt like I had cross the line into art photography.

Another big difference is for me art photography is my vision, not an art director's or client's. Again there can be crossover, but to me this makes a big difference. I would take the photos I like to take even if nobody else would ever see them. I'm compelled to do it because I want to and just feel like I should.

Edit to add: I have a much harder time judging if someone else's is, or more even harder, isn't art. In many cases this is too ambiguous and art is so personal I don't feel it's my place to say what it is or isn't.

[cbaytan]

where's the line between fine art photography and reportage? In other words, is Thomas an artist or a photographer? If someone today with no artistic aspirations walks onto a scene of similar violence and snaps a picture with their iPhone, does that make them an artist?

Good questions, I loved it.

IMO there are there is no boundary between documentary and fine art photo, if you can give the thematic message with your iphone or any camera with a documentary frame taken, yes it is possible being an fine art photographer with iphone. Unless the minimum technical requirements for particular art piece exceeds iphone capabilities, for instance like sharpness

In fact Capa wasn't in the right place at the right time, if you look from the angle of documentary photography Capa's piece is a fake, Capa planned this photo because it is proven that, there was no battle in there at that time. But if you look from the Fine Art window, it doesn't matter, Capa is given the message all right to all humankind.

There is a famous old photographer Ara Guler is actually a documentary photographer, he claims he is not into Art nor he is an artist, but if you look his works, his compositions, and messages he is giving he is clearly wrong, he is certainly a fine art photographer also. If you look his photos, I think you will understand better what I am trying to say.

Please let me know (or anyone) if Ara Guler is a documentary photographer, or Fine Art photographer. His page is here (Click on Istanbul for instance):

Ara Güler | Resmi Web Sitesi

Note: To whom get bored from B&W photos, almost all of his photos are B&W, because he is really old (82) and he developed photos at his house, he still does.

About the sculpture vs. painting debate LOL. LOL to this claim in that page: "The painters said they had to invent everything and the sculptor practically nothing"

My answer to this claim is this sculpture , it is in my neighborhood for 25 years, I was looking at him from my childhood. It's name is Mediterranean.

[johnmflores]

Photomontage has been around a lot longer than Photoshop, Cbaytan.

One could create an image like Guernica using many negatives and an enlarger. It would be a lot of work, but it would be possible. It wouldn't look painterly necessarily, but it would be a montage.

I don't know if Photography has a Picasso; David Hockney did create a lot of cubism-inspired photomontages.

Here's something I've played around with....




To be honest, I wasn't aware of Hockney's stuff until after I started playing around. Honest!

[brofkand]

Very interesting you were unaware of Hockney before you started. What was your inspiration to do a montage, then? Was it simply curiosity, or were you inspired by a different artist or work?

[WPRESTO]

The debate about "fine art" photography was old when I got my first Pentax in the 1950's. As one commentator mentioned, it was sometimes used for nude or "figure study" photography to distinguish such from what appeared in girly magazines. It was also used, as one commentator noted, for photographs intended to be sold for their intrinsic beauty, to be hung on a wall as a decorative element, as you would a painting. There were also negative definitions: 1) not vacation pictures; 2) not family fun/party/celebration/holiday pictures; 3) not studio portraits done at the behest of the subject. There are always thin lines, for example portraits taken by Karsh. We can debate this forever. As with many so-called "eternal questions," there is no set answer to this any more than there will ever be a universally accepted answer to "what is beauty?"

[cbaytan]

The debate about "fine art" photography was old when I got my first Pentax in the 1950's. As one commentator mentioned, it was sometimes used for nude or "figure study" photography to distinguish such from what appeared in girly magazines. It was also used, as one commentator noted, for photographs intended to be sold for their intrinsic beauty, to be hung on a wall as a decorative element, as you would a painting. There were also negative definitions: 1) not vacation pictures; 2) not family fun/party/celebration/holiday pictures; 3) not studio portraits done at the behest of the subject. There are always thin lines, for example portraits taken by Karsh. We can debate this forever. As with many so-called "eternal questions," there is no set answer to this any more than there will ever be a universally accepted answer to "what is beauty?"

There are set answers for the beauty for the time being,

Aesthetics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are two keywords in Fine arts:

Mimesis:

Mimesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And Catharsis:

Catharsis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why don't we look at the direct definition(s) of Fine Arts:

Art - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[RioRico]

And the point I tried to make is based on the question of this thread: What is "fine art" photography?

Much photography is (or isn't) wonderful art. More than a few very gifted and skilled artists work in photography, "drawing/writing with light". But the question was not raised about wonderful artists producing wonderful photos. The question is about Fine Art Photography (FAP), which is a commercial label. And from what I've seen over too many decades, stuff bearing the FAP label too often doesn't qualify as fine (wonderful) art. If a photo is great, it doesn't *need* an official FAP seal embossed on it.

I suspect that Fine Art Photographer is a job category at New York City unemployment offices, much as Elvis Impersonator is a job category in Las Vegas. (It really is, too!!) But unlike the Elvis Impersonator, who must at least own a spangled suit and wraparound shades, the Fine Art Photographer need only display their MFA paper to be accorded official recognition. Do all the art academies really churn out Fine Artists? Are only credentialed FAPs eligible for the agent-gallery-museum network?

OK everybody, go out and create some wonderful photos. Just don't call them FAP, please.

[Blue]

If we are going to use famous painters as examples, what about Van Gogh? Did he even know he was creating masterpieces? As far as Capa goes, I would argue the serendipity favors the prepared.

[johnmflores]

Very interesting you were unaware of Hockney before you started. What was your inspiration to do a montage, then? Was it simply curiosity, or were you inspired by a different artist or work?

Simple curiosity - an attempt to capture the energy and vibe of a space in a different way.

If we are going to use famous painters as examples, what about Van Gogh? Did he even know he was creating masterpieces? As far as Capa goes, I would argue the serendipity favors the prepared.

For sure Capa put himself in that position. But what about the amateur photos of the airplane floating in the Hudson River in NYC, passengers standing on the wing waiting for the rescue boat.

Plane crash into Hudson River | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Is everyone that snapped a photo of the plane - even with their camera phone - now entitled to call themselves Fine Art Photographers?

IMO there is a distinct difference between fine art and photojournalism and Capa is photojournalism. Excellent photojournalism, but photojournalism nonetheless.

[Blue]

Simple curiosity - an attempt to capture the energy and vibe of a space in a different way.



For sure Capa put himself in that position. But what about the amateur photos of the airplane floating in the Hudson River in NYC, passengers standing on the wing waiting for the rescue boat.

Plane crash into Hudson River | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Is everyone that snapped a photo of the plane - even with their camera phone - now entitled to call themselves Fine Art Photographers?

IMO there is a distinct difference between fine art and photojournalism and Capa is photojournalism. Excellent photojournalism, but photojournalism nonetheless.

While the Capa image started out as photojournalism and war correspondence, it survived the test of time as one of the all great images. Few would argue that. My point is that sometimes the line are blurred and things can fit more than one interpretation and category. That makes pigeon holing a challenge. I'm not sure the Capa shot could have been made with a cell phone and had the lasting impact it had. Furthermore, how many people would be flipping their cell phone in a fire fight or full blown battle? When cell phones can compete with the 645D, we will have to re-assess that.

Edit: Hugh Es and Eddie Adams are a couple of more photographers/journalists that come to mind whose work won Pulitzer Prizes etc. These guys were in some serious situations and to great risks to be in a position to capture their images. I'm not arguing there photos are fine art, but they are under the auspices of the Arts and Letters at University. I find their work a hell of a lot more moving than Picasso.

[donallison13]

Fine art is when me, the Tree Rat Popper, and the Camp Boys go tree ratting and catch a den of these critters with our 12 gauges cocked and ready. After the fireworks, the trees are ablaze with fine art of the brightest reds. Cheers. Don

[Ray]

Some very informative, inspiring and insightful replies. Thanks.

A follow-up question just to keep the debate afloat:

Can fine art photography be created with a camera phone?

If not, then does that mean that fine art photography is, at least in part, technologically driven? In other words, are there certain minimum requirements on camera equipment?

It is often said that it is not the camera that is important, but the photographer. Howver, this rule must have certain limitations. If so, what are they.

[mattb123]

Some very informative, inspiring and insightful replies. Thanks.

A follow-up question just to keep the debate afloat:

Can fine art photography be created with a camera phone?

If not, then does that mean that fine art photography is, at least in part, technologically driven? In other words, are there certain minimum requirements on camera equipment?

It is often said that it is not the camera that is important, but the photographer. Howver, this rule must have certain limitations. If so, what are they.

Absolutely!
Another thing about art is that a piece or technique that might be unappealing to some is genius to others.
I don't care for most cell phone pics, but just like a Holga, in the right hands and under the right conditions, some great images can be created.

[mattb123]

And the point I tried to make is based on the question of this thread: What is "fine art" photography?

...

OK everybody, go out and create some wonderful photos. Just don't call them FAP, please.

I don't think I'm going to start using that term in reference to what I do with my camera!

[cbaytan]

Can fine art photography be created with a camera phone?

If not, then does that mean that fine art photography is, at least in part, technologically driven? In other words, are there certain minimum requirements on camera equipment?

It is often said that it is not the camera that is important, but the photographer. Howver, this rule must have certain limitations. If so, what are they.

Anything, mud and a stick, root dye and bare hands, with any recording technique, artists can create art, below pictures taken with 2MP basic digital camera, not even a DSLR.

Jeff Alu - Houses

But if artists message need more resolution to artifact exposes "contained message" more openly he/she will need a better camera. If message needs colors, artist will need colors, these are the limitations, see?