Photographer Or Artist?

Photographer Or Artist?

  • Photographer

    Votes: 59 77.6%

  • Artist

    Votes: 17 22.4%
  • Total voters
    76
Pookeyhead said:
I get the feeling most hobbyists don't want it to be art. Photography being art raises the bar a little uncomfortably high for some I think; Makes things complicated. It implies there's more to this photography lark than just sharp focus, good exposure and composition.
Click to expand...

It's nothing to do with ability, I've seen work from, what I believe to be some of the best photographers in the world. But none of them would go anywhere near calling themselves an artist.
 
Steve said:
In whose judgement are they not artists.... yours?
Click to expand...

Are we just going to suggest that anybody who takes a photo is an artist then?

I'm going to take a photo 5 stops over exposure, then increase by 4 stops in Lightroom. It will be completely white, but that's what I intended.

I'm an artist then, yeah? No, just pretentious for claiming to be one.

You didn't reference to any of my other points.
 
Ben, if you want to produce a blank canvas print of an overexposed photo and call it art, it's art and you're an artist.

But good luck selling it! It's already been done. ;)
 
SimonH said:
Ben, if you want to produce a blank canvas print of an overexposed photo and call it art, it's art and you're an artist.

But good luck selling it! It's already been done. ;)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be pretentious enough to do that Simon.

Sales are not a gauge for measuring whether art is good or not. It's more arty if it doesn't sell :)
 
Going by the definition of the word artist, one could potentially call themselves an artist. Technically.

Personally, I am a photographer and no matter how much or what kind of editing or retouching I do, I will not make that transition into the word artist as technically it may be correct but I would feel pretentious.

That being said, I prefer Photography over art and one may not be more skillful than the other so I wouldn't take offence to someone that uses either or both words interchangeably.
 
I don't undertsand why people are so hung up about calling themself an artist here.

It is almost like an inverted snobbery and anyone who is an artist is somehow pretentious.

Reflects more badly on the people who have a problem than those than are happy to call themselves an artist...
 
theurbanclown said:
Being a photographer is matter of fact i.e somebody who takes photos. It's a bit like a builder, claiming he is an artist because he layed a few bricks. Of course that person is to think that, but it doesn't make it true.
Click to expand...

So all people who use a camera are photographers but only some of them are also artists.
A builder could lay a few bricks following a set pattern layed out for him to follow. Or he could be creative and produce something of higher aesthetic or emotional value while still creating a functioning building therefore being an artist.
 
ernesto said:
I don't undertsand why people are so hung up about calling themself an artist here.

It is almost like an inverted snobbery and anyone who is an artist is somehow pretentious.

Reflects more badly on the people who have a problem than those than are happy to call themselves an artist...
Click to expand...


Agree. I touched on similar on page 1. I don't get all this "I'm a camera operator" as if it's some stance against artistry or a thinking that it's more hardcore to not label yourself or something :thinking: I don't get it anyhow.
 
ernesto said:
So all people who use a camera are photographers but only some of them are also artists.
A builder could lay a few bricks following a set pattern layed out for him to follow. Or he could be creative and produce something of higher aesthetic or emotional value while still creating a functioning building therefore being an artist.
Click to expand...

Who is saying that set pattern layed out in front of them is not art? It represents repetition and uniform.

Wow, this art thing is easy :)
 
theurbanclown said:
Who is saying that set pattern layed out in front of them is not art? It represents repetition and uniform.

Wow, this art thing is easy :)
Click to expand...

The pattern layed out in front on them was not theirs so it was someone elses art that they are following. They are a producer of art rather than the artist .

And you say art is easy as though you thought it should be hard or something? It is not a case of easy or difficult but a case of being able to or even wanting to portray what you feel or want to get across.
If all you can do is a simple drawing then so be it, it is still art. It may not be very good or appreciated art but that is not what we are discussing here.
 
Last edited:
ernesto said:
I don't undertsand why people are so hung up about calling themself an artist here.

It is almost like an inverted snobbery and anyone who is an artist is somehow pretentious.

Reflects more badly on the people who have a problem than those than are happy to call themselves an artist...
Click to expand...

You could just as easily ask why some people are hung up on wanting to call themselves artists. Perhaps they snobbishly think it makes them more important than mere artisans? :D
 
I'd class photogaphy as an art form so I personally would say both - Even without any PP work then you are creating something that would (Hopefully!) evoke emotions from the viewer -I think 'artist' is a very, very vague term though and should be consinged to room 101!
 
theurbanclown said:
That's just changing settings. Everybody can do that, and I mean everybody.
Click to expand...

No they can't. How many people sport SLRs and never take them off Auto ? - not that that's an arbiter of artistic intent. Move your feet and change the distribution of the figures within the frame then you are making an artistic judgement. Good or bad doesn't matter. You are making a deliberate change.

I think that the issue here is that we're using the same term to mean different things.
 
theurbanclown said:
That's just changing settings. Everybody can do that, and I mean everybody.

Does that mean everyone is an artist?
Click to expand...

Now you are starting to get it. Choosing to make a setting change to produce a different output is an artistic decision. So everyone can be an artist yes (don't worry about what they produce as that is irrelevant)
 
Last edited:
ernesto said:
Choosing to make a setting change to produce a different output is an artistic decision.
Click to expand...

Surely that's a technical decision, an artistic decision would be a change in composition or mood.
 
robhooley167 said:
Surely that's a technical decision, an artistic decision would be a change in composition or mood.
Click to expand...

You can make desicions about any of the technical settings in the camera to deliberately induce desired visual effects and those choices can be artistic. From using a high ISO to introduce artificial texture to using a longer shutter to stretch the movement of water.
 
robhooley167 said:
Surely that's a technical decision, an artistic decision would be a change in composition or mood.
Click to expand...

It is an artistic decision using technical know how. Changing teh exposure changes how the image looks, changing DoF changes how the image looks.

For example, lots of people want a low DoF for some of their shots - that is because they think it looks better and consciuously want it to look like that. They are being artistic.
 
theurbanclown said:
Are we just going to suggest that anybody who takes a photo is an artist then?

I'm going to take a photo 5 stops over exposure, then increase by 4 stops in Lightroom. It will be completely white, but that's what I intended.

I'm an artist then, yeah? No, just pretentious for claiming to be one.

You didn't reference to any of my other points.
Click to expand...

If they intend it to be art then yes. What right does anyone else have to say it's not art?

You can debate whether it is 'good art' or not, but you cannot deny it is art.

And as for 'You didn't reference to any of my other points'...well no I didn't deem it necessary to.
 
theurbanclown said:
I wouldn't be pretentious enough to do that Simon.

Sales are not a gauge for measuring whether art is good or not. It's more arty if it doesn't sell :)
Click to expand...

It's an artistic tradition that the value of an artist's work isn't recognised until they're too old to enjoy their success, or are dead. ;)

But it's also a characteristic of artists to be self-deprecating. So the more you protest, the more artistic you must be! :D
 
theurbanclown said:
If somebody calls you an artist, or your work art, then fair enough. Call yourself an artist, and I will think you're being a bit of an idiot.
Click to expand...

Okay, I retract my earlier statement that you were starting to get it...
 
How about "photo artist"? It seems to fit nicely in between "artist" and "photographer".

(That's how a landscape photographer local to me describes himself.)
 
theurbanclown said:
If somebody calls you an artist, or your work art, then fair enough. Call yourself an artist, and I will think you're being a bit of an idiot.
Click to expand...

So what do you call yourself?

Every child can pick up a paintbrush and paint and call it art, he may even say, "Look Mom, I'm an artist." And it may very well be true because he is working at the limit of his potential. Then take one of us. We create a photograph (generally considered art) and then sell it or hang it up, and everyone call it art. That makes us, the maker of the art, an artist. Don't we then have the right to call ourselves an artist?

It's all very subjective; this is just my take on it.
 
theurbanclown said:
Call yourself an artist, and I will think you're being a bit of an idiot.
Click to expand...

You don't think that viewpoint is perhaps a tad arrogant? If Ansel Adams were alive and described himself to you as an artist would you have called him an idiot for doing so?

If a painter described themselves as an artist would you call them an idiot? If a songwriter called themselves an artist would you call them an idiot? If not, why not? Why is photography any different in artistic terms to painting or writing a song?
 
I feel that any really good image must have some artistic merit - be it in various degrees

Les :thumbs:
 
theurbanclown said:
If somebody calls you an artist, or your work art, then fair enough. Call yourself an artist, and I will think you're being a bit of an idiot.
Click to expand...

aaaah....now I understand what trolling is.
 
Rustico said:
So what do you call yourself?

Every child can pick up a paintbrush and paint and call it art, he may even say, "Look Mom, I'm an artist." And it may very well be true because he is working at the limit of his potential. Then take one of us. We create a photograph (generally considered art) and then sell it or hang it up, and everyone call it art. That makes us, the maker of the art, an artist. Don't we then have the right to call ourselves an artist?

It's all very subjective; this is just my take on it.
Click to expand...

I call myself somebody who takes photos; a photographer. If I danced I would call myself a dancer. If I acted I would call myself an actor. If I built things, a builder.

I've sold photos in galleries. Would I call myself an artist? Never.

Phil Young said:
But TECHNICALLY it would be correct to call oneself an artist.

Your opinion therefore is ignorance.
Click to expand...

Technically, maybe. But look in the mirror whilst recording yourself saying "I am an artist", then play it back and laugh at how ridiculous you sound :)
 
theurbanclown said:
Not to be mistaken with a difference of opinion in a debate :)
Click to expand...

I go back to something that I alluded to earlier, which is what we as individuals see art as. What is your opinion of what makes an artist ? What does someone have to do to earn the label, if it's something that we're not allowed to call ourselves .. ?
 
theurbanclown said:
Not to be mistaken with a difference of opinion in a debate :)
Click to expand...

Did you perhaps miss my earlier question? If so, here it is again:

If Ansel Adams were alive and described himself to you as an artist would you have called him an idiot for doing so?

If a painter described themselves as an artist would you call them an idiot? If a songwriter called themselves an artist would you call them an idiot? If not, why not? Why is photography any different in artistic terms to painting or writing a song?
 
ChrisGilbert said:
I go back to something that I alluded to earlier, which is what we as individuals see art as. What is your opinion of what makes an artist ? What does someone have to do to earn the label, if it's something that we're not allowed to call ourselves .. ?
Click to expand...

Somebody who takes every traditional rule of their art form, throws that out of the window, makes their own rules and creates something I like to listen to or look at. All whilst being modest enough, not to call themselves an artist :)

PMN said:
Did you perhaps miss my earlier question? If so, here it is again:

If Ansel Adams were alive and described himself to you as an artist would you have called him an idiot for doing so?

If a painter described themselves as an artist would you call them an idiot? If a songwriter called themselves an artist would you call them an idiot? If not, why not? Why is photography any different in artistic terms to painting or writing a song?
Click to expand...

I think he'd describe himself as a photographer.

Maybe 'idiot' is too strong, but I'd certainly question their personality and the way they view themselves.
 
theurbanclown said:
All whilst being modest enough, not to call themselves an artist
Click to expand...

An artist is simply someone who produces art. As has been said before, calling someone an artist doesn't mean they produce good art, it merely means they produce art. Modesty doesn't even come into it.


theurbanclown said:
I'd certainly question their personality and the way they view themselves.
Click to expand...

Why? That's a massively arrogant outlook. What position are you in to "question" someone's personality if they describe themselves as an artist?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top