any serious photographers out there...

I hate those "terms", but yes, me. I have been exhibiting and published since 1980. Though my current gallery shut down last year, I still sell prints through various outlets, and am represented by a few stock agencies.
 
I don't really see "photographer" as a subcategory of "artist", exactly. The terms are fuzzy, of course, and I would argue that there is art in photography, the same way there is art in writing, but there are still writers who are not (or I wouldn't call) artists. I also happen to do some illustration and graphic design and I draw and less frequently paint, so yes, I do ALSO call myself an artist at times (if I think it might impress a chick).

Anyone who has ever met me knows just how firmly my tongue was in my cheek when typing that last comment!
 
Artist is not necessarily a bad word. Depends on how you pronounce it. ar-teest...that's the irritating wannabes with their flannel shirts and patchouli salves that kept me from going to art school (that and the fact that I had no idea you could go to school for drawing comics with other clean-cut nerds like myself). And then there are the ar-teests that sit around pontificating on what art is or isn't....oh, wait. I will type no more forever. :)
 
The term "artist" doesn't bother me at all. When the term "pro" comes before photographer, I get a bad taste in my mouth.
 
Does it matter? I take photographs, I'm a photographer. If someone else wants to call me an artist, that's fine, but calling myself an artist seems a bit pointless. I've met many painters, sculptors, etc., who feel the same: they're more likely to say "I'm a painter (or whatever)" than "I'm an artist," which doesn't really tell you anything.

Also, I've met far too many people who press their wrists to their foreheads, literally or figuratively, and exclaim, "I am an Artist!" (you can hear the capital 'A') when they mean "I can't be bothered to learn anything technical" or "I am incapable of earning a living" or "Your petty concerns are beneath me." I'd prefer not to be lumped in with them.

Cheers,

R.
 
To me, photography is a tricky one when used in the same sentence as art, as anyone can take a photo, some people are quite decent at it, most are not and don't care. I draw and paint for a living, as an old fashion drawing based illustrator, it's not art, but it's a close relative to it because I use techniques learned from art and artistic sensibilities, composition, colour and so on.

If an artist takes a photo, does that mean that it's art? No, of course not, some artists are simply rubbish at it. Some are rubbish photographers, and have the guts to call it art, make huge prints, then make a huge fortune. It's a weird one.

I like to say that photography can be an artistic pursuit, but it's hardly ever art. We judge each photos in different ways, some of our views and ideas are related to art, some technical, emotional, historical. Isn't that why it's a great thing to do and discuss, because it can be everything, or nothing, it's a brilliant thing. I love it.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Does it matter? I take photographs, I'm a photographer. If someone else wants to call me an artist, that's fine, but calling myself an artist seems a bit pointless. I've met many painters, sculptors, etc., who feel the same: they're more likely to say "I'm a painter (or whatever)" than "I'm an artist," which doesn't really tell you anything.

Also, I've met far too many people who press their wrists to their foreheads, literally or figuratively, and exclaim, "I am an Artist!" (you can hear the capital 'A') when they mean "I can't be bothered to learn anything technical" or "I am incapable of earning a living" or "Your petty concerns are beneath me." I'd prefer not to be lumped in with them.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Roger,

There are idiots in any profession or trade. I don't see lawyers shying away from being called lawyers because some lawyers are ambulance-chasing dickheads. They shouldn't. Good lawyers do a valuable service for thier clients, just as good artists produce something of value to their customers. I refuse to be ashamed to be an artist because some are idiots.
 
mrrobleyleica said:
I like to say that photography can be an artistic pursuit, but it's hardly ever art. We judge each photos in different ways, some of our views and ideas are related to art, some technical, emotional, historical. Isn't that why it's a great thing to do and discuss, because it can be everything, or nothing, it's a brilliant thing. I love it.
Click to expand...

This was settled a CENTURY ago, and people are still spouting this ignorant bigotry? What's sad is that so many photographers themselves are the ones doing it. I never hear other artists hating on photography. Ever.

Years ago, I was watching Jerry Springer, and the guest on the show was a black man who wanted to join the Ku Klux Klan because he (the black guy) thought that black people were subhuman. Racism is stupid, and anyone with any intelligence has known it for a long time.

These photographers tearing down photography remind me of that guy who wanted to join the KKK. A guy espousing an idiotic idea that no one of consequence believes in anymore, and that tears himself down.
 
i have a bone-deep creative streak in me that was expressed in writing columns in newspapers for 30-odd years, and the occasional poem. art? every now and then. writer? no.
i draw some in ink, and recently have used oil pastels. nope, no art there, not with my left hand having all the drawing talent of brass knuckles.
photography? yes, a hobby photographer. every now and then a photo reaches art level. so, artist with a very small "a?" no, i take back my earlier post. i aspire for some of my photos to be considered art. but i am not an artist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom