Photography As Art?

[redskulldoctorzeno]

Photography as art?
A lot of people have a problem with that concept.
Well, folks, I reckon it is all relative.
Van Gogh? Hmmm, well, maybe.....
Gauguin? Nah.
Picasso? His blue period paintings are GREAT. However, most of his other stuff leaves me very cold (with the exception of "Guernica").
As for today's photographers there are no better ARTISTS than Masaaki Toyoura and Angelo Victor Mercure.

[Hickeroar]

I have been far more moved as a person by images coming from cameras than images coming from a paint brush.

I think there's a sense of REALITY to a photograph that allows you to interface with it on a deeper level. It's also easier to reflect upon the beauty of a green hillside when you can see IT instead of someones representation of it. A well taken photograph makes you forget that it's a photograph and instead places you there with its contents.

[megan]

Why do you like those two artists?
Do you have links to their work?
(Yes, I know I can google them, but it would be far more interesting if you posted links to your favorite images and told us what moves you about them.) Please?

[mtbbrian]

If Angelo Victor Mercure, is the same person I am thinking of, he has posted here before.
His photography, in my opinion is borderline art and pornography.
This is the title of one of his sites; "Ironbamboo - B&W - Asian Transsexual Ladyboys".

Photography is very much an art form worthy of hanging next to any of the more accpeted mediums.
I have never understood or liked for that matter the hang ups that other artists have with photography.
Expressing yourself in a thoughtful and conscious(and sometimes unconscious) way, no matter the medium is artistic.

Brian

[Medley]

His photography, in my opinion is borderline art and pornography.
This is the title of one of his sites; "Ironbamboo - B&W - Asian Transsexual Ladyboys".

Indeed, and having googled both artists this seems to be what they both have in common. Far be it for me to opine on what does and does not constitute "art", but I am in complete agreement with Brian.

-Joe U.

[jehosofatmcgillicudy]

Angelo Victor Mercure?
Ha, ha, ha.
Now, there is an artist so cutthroat, so frightfully ambitious, so frightfully interesting (never mind if he is "good" or not) that you had better watch out for your grandmother's safety, this guy will walk right over her if he believes it will further his career (no offense meant, I do not wish to get sued!). This guy puts hustlers like Jackson Pollock and Andy Warhol to shame!
In all seriousness, Mercure definitely knows the right people in the right places (perhaps he sleeps with the right people in the right places? Only joking! Don't slap me with any torts, please!) and love him or hate him, he is a force with whom to be reckoned in today's contemporary photography scene.
As for Masaaki Toyoura, great photographer, but he seems to have dropped off the face of the earth in recent years.

[jackholtzman]

Mr. McGillicudy: Why the need to be rude? Have you done any work of note?
Do tell......
Thank you.

[jehosofatmcgillicudy]

Don't shoot.
I'm only a messenger!
Okay, let's be serious for a minute, shall we?
You say I am "rude".
Well, maybe I came across as "less than polite".
How's that for a cop-out, huh?
The fact is I actually LIKE some (certainly not all) of Mercure's work.
In regard to his http://www.ironbamboo.com site, I do enjoy his Boys and Girls gallery very much and, NO, I am NOT gay!
Otherwise, the work which I enjoy even more can be found on his http://www.angelovictormercure.com site.
I feel that his animal and people portraiture are both superlative.
And, from reading the "commentaries" and "guestbook" sections of his sites, he does have his admirers, some of them quite prominent.
I am neither an admirer or quite prominent.
Having said that, I am, however, out of here.
Looks like a lotta folks have thin skins, not necessarily you, Jack, so please don't get grouchy again.
Forgive my provincial attitudes.
Good luck.

[Ronnoco]

Expressing yourself in a thoughtful and conscious(and sometimes unconscious) way, no matter the medium is artistic.

Brian

Gee, based on that nonsensical definition, getting mad and putting a dint in a garbage can with a good kick, makes it art!!!!!!

Pretty silly, I think.

Ronnoco

[Ronnoco]

Expressing yourself in a thoughtful and conscious(and sometimes unconscious) way, no matter the medium is artistic.

Brian

Actually that is a 70s concept of hippy generation. Expressing yourself is NOT artistic ever! Art is communicating through the parameters and accepted quality standards of the medium. When it comes to photography those accepted quality standards are in technique and composition.

Ronnoco

[mtbbrian]

Actually that is a 70s concept of hippy generation. Expressing yourself is NOT artistic ever! Art is communicating through the parameters and accepted quality standards of the medium. When it comes to photography those accepted quality standards are in technique and composition.

Ronnoco

Whatever you say......

[jackholtzman]

Masaaki Toyoura???
I found this link on Google:
[url]http://www.task-lab.com/toyoura/index2.html
We are not in Kansas anymore

[jackholtzman]

Hi.
I'm back.
It seems that I did not transcribe that link properly.
Let me try again:
http://www.task-lab.com/toyoura/index2.html

[Ronnoco]

Whatever you say......

Well, let me put it a different way. If you consider all your photographic work that is self-expression as artistic works, then I am truly overwhelmed by either your extreme egotism or your extreme challenge in the area of intelligence and a sense of reality.

Ronnoco

[Medley]

Art is communicating through the parameters and accepted quality standards of the medium.

And yet some of the most successful artists throughout history have been the ones who pushed the edge of the envelope, thereby expanding the parameters and accepted standards.

-Joe U.

[Ronnoco]

And yet some of the most successful artists throughout history have been the ones who pushed the edge of the envelope, thereby expanding the parameters and accepted standards.

-Joe U.

My point, Joe, is that they may have pushed the edge of the envelope and expanded the parameters and accepted standards,...BUT they did not totally IGNORE the parameters or the standards. Those that did, there work did not stand the test of time.

The standards may have expanded but they have not been thrown out or totally changed.

Ronnoco

[Didache]

The really great artists who have pushed the envelopes and sometimes ignored the rules, were themselves masters of the rules. You have to really know what you are doing if you want to expand the boundaries. There is a UK comedian (now sadly gone) who used to do a comedy routine on a piano. He would start off playing straight and then start hitting bum notes at crucial points in the music. The result was hilarious. My point here is that he really had to be a first rate pianist (he was!) in order to mess with the music in the way he did.

Similarly with photography I think. Sure we always need people who push the edges back - but I defy anyone to find an artist who did that in a meaningful and lasting way without first being a master of the conventional.

Cheers
Mike

[Ronnoco]

Similarly with photography I think. Sure we always need people who push the edges back - but I defy anyone to find an artist who did that in a meaningful and lasting way without first being a master of the conventional.

Cheers
Mike

Agreed Mike. Interesting that I even find photographers who are portrayed in magazine articles as ignoring rules, really don't. I noticed that one for example spent considerable time getting the tones and the gradation between tones absolutely perfect. Certainly not ignoring basic technique. The elements of design were not ignored either.

The only things he really did differently were using film instead of digital with a lot of darkroom work as well as shooting in black and white. However he used the best technique possible for black and white and followed most, if not all of the guidelines for composition as well.

Ronnoco