|
Forum: Photographic Technique
01-15-2011, 05:40 PM
|
| |
I've heard it said, several times, that it's not the camera that's important, it's the photographer. Whilst I recognise that there is a lot of truth to this statement, it's not ABSOLUTELY true. If it were absolutely true, then the professionals would all be using disposable cameras - and clearly they don't. And surely, given the choice, most of us would opt for cameras which give us options, control, flexibility and the scope to be creative. That being the case, this idea that it's not the camera, but the person behind it must be re-evaluated.
I'm suggesting that it's not the camera that's of prime importance, BUT it helps.
ANY thoughts on this and other related issues?
:confused:
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
01-15-2011, 05:24 PM
|
| |
The biggest dvelopment in photography at the moment is its democratisation. More and more people own and use cameras, as since the age of digital we are all able to learn at a much faster rate than before. What this adds up to is an ever-growing pool of increasingly talented amateur photographers. This must be having an impact on the professionals.
Any thoughts on this?
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
01-14-2011, 03:20 PM
|
| |
Thanks for all the responses so far.
There does seem to be a a movement in favour of absolute sharpness, but as well as that, there also seems to be a striving for 'perfection' which is stifling creativity.
For example, if sharpness and lack of noise are deemed to be good, does that mean that blurred photos with noise have no place in photography? It seems that certain aspects of creativity are being squeezed out in this striving for technical perfection.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
01-13-2011, 04:39 PM
|
| |
Just a few thoughts on photography today. It seems that every era has particular movements, styles and trends in photography, which partly define that period in time. We seem to be living in a very innovative age today in terms of new technologies in photography and in terms of using those new technologies for creativity. I just wanted to get people's thoughts on he following questions:
What are the chief features in contemporary photography today?
Are there any particular movements on photography today?
Who are today's movers and shakers?
Given current trends, what are your predictions for the "cutting edge" photography of tomorrow?
Has photography been drained of all new ideas or is there still plenty of potential left for innovation in photography?
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
12-07-2010, 01:59 PM
|
| |
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.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
09-25-2010, 04:11 PM
|
| |
What is the difference, if any, between photography as an art and photography as a craft?
If there is a difference, and if "fine art" describes the art of photography at its finest, then would it be useful to coin the term "fine craft" (i.e. craft at its finest)?
AND if there are any real differences between "art" and "craft", then at what point do they meet or overlap?
Just a few qustions to keep the debate simmering. |
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
09-23-2010, 01:47 PM
|
| |
Thanks for the responses so far.
When does photography become "fine art"?
Some definitions of "fine art" seem to touch on the fact that it is defined as such if the photographer has "artistic" intentions. BUT what is it about these intentions that make them "fine"?
Sometimes it may refer to the process involved in producing an image, from capturing the image straight through post production to eventually showing the image to a wider public. Any thoughts on this, that "fine art" describes a process?
I've also come across the suggestion that "fine art" photography can only be produced by photographers who have built up credentials that have allowed them to enter the world of profesional artists. These credentials usually take the form of qualifications or they may take the form of contacts. Either way, it appears that the world of professional "fine art" photography has become so [institutionalised that it is very difficult and almost impossible to enter this world of "fine art" (and/or professional) photography purely on merit. |
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
09-22-2010, 03:04 PM
|
| |
I have come across the term "fine art" photography being used increasingly more frequently over the last decade by a range of photographers.
What qualifies as "fine art" photography?
What is it about the art being created that makes it "fine"?
Is the term of value in any meaningful way, or is it simply a marketing device for photographers?
In short, I am trying to pin down exactly what "fine art" photography is? |
|
Forum: Site Suggestions and Help
08-13-2010, 12:09 PM
|
| |
Looking forward to taking part.
|
