artist?

[back alley]

with talk elsewhere of rff being mostly a gear forum and not so much a photography forum got me thinking a bit...
who here considers themselves to be an artist?
does being an artist impact your philosophy about gear? is gear just a means to an end or does it contribute to your art?
what stops us, as a group, from discussing photography/art?

 

[petronius]

Helmut Newton said once, that there are two dirty words in photography: One is "Art" and the other is "Tasteful".

 

[Darthfeeble]

If an artist is one who aspires to create beauty, then I'd like to think of myself as an artist.

 

[Arbitrarium]

I've never considered photography as art. But then, I'm a graphic designer by trade and I wouldn't call that art either. We should probably avoid trying to define what is and isn't art though because that'll go on forever.

I always think it sounds a bit vain when people say they "make" pictures. Yes, perhaps photography requires some level of skill but you're not "making" the picture. You're taking the picture. Framing the world and taking it away with you.

I do a lot of 'creative' photography with prism filters, double/triple exposures, expired film etc. and I still wouldn't say the finished image was the work of an artist. And I still wouldn't say I "made" the image.

But then, I'm a sour, jaded git.

I think critique/gallery type posts get lost because there's little to discuss. You can chime in with your take on the pictures and that's about it. There's no back-and-forth like a discussion about gear options would have. And maybe there's an element of people's inclination to only go to the effort of giving feedback if it's negative.

 

[oftheherd]

Maybe we need a definition of artist first. 😛

Personally, I think if one looks at the gallery, and the photos for the week threads, there can be little doubt we have people here who can and do produce photographic art. However one chooses to define it. And how about the W/NW threads?

I was unaware other places on the 'net considered RFF as gear-centric. Maybe I need to get out more on the i'net. I am happy with the mix we have on RFF. I don't mind gear threads. Too much Leica? I read some of them or not. Those I read I figure are going to enlighten me, which I can always use.

I wonder if it might have something to do with how RFF was born? It was the RFF forum, not the everything photographic forum (although we sure do cover a lot of interesting photographic areas). RFF covered RF cameras, which other forums did not, and it was hard to find forums that covered RF, and if allowed, not many people were interested in participating. So RFF became a magnet for RF inclined photographers.

That said, we do cover a lot of gear. But what's wrong with that? I found it fascinating reading about the FSU cameras and how they could take expensive Leica and Contax lenses. Who knew?

Will be interesting to see what others say.

 

[back alley]

to clarify...the gear folks comment was born from a thread here on rff...many members think of us as a gear related forum with not enough photography/image discussion.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Why I have to consider myself as an artist if all I want is to be able to talk about art aspects in photography and on this forum?

If you are not self-proclaimed artist you have no rights to talk about art on forums? Are official artists free to enter art museums?

 

[f16sunshine]

to clarify...the gear folks comment was born from a thread here on rff...many members think of us as a gear related forum with not enough photography/image discussion.

Many Members are correct.

 

[robert blu]

I consider my self an aspiring artist.
In my visual passions, photography and drawing I try to be (become?) an artist, if artist is someone who learns, practices and tries to express his own ideas and visions through his art.

In most cases I do not think gear is essential for this, most of the photographs I consider good or interesting could have been taken with my Leica M7 or with my Nikon FM2 or....I know someone will feel horrified by such a statement, please keep it within a broad view 🙂

With one exception: a particular wabi-sabi project I'm working on I can do better with Polaroid cameras and Impossible film, because of the experience and the inaccurate look. In this case for sure gear contributes to my attempt for art.

As for discussing photography or art in a forum I find it very difficult, partly because english is not my native language and this makes difficult to express opinions where meaning could have subtle hints. Of course I would not like to be offensive by using a wrong words when discussing someone else work.
What I like to do is when I have time for the "gallery picks for the week... " thread always to explain in a few words why I select certain photos. Also in the comments for the photos in the gallery when I like a photo I always comment why, what is interesting or good in that photo.

robert

 

[Erik van Straten]

Art is about fantasy, imagination. First you need fantasy, imagination, to see pictures, images or stories in the world around you. Secondly you'll need a craft to realize them. So photography is an art, but somehow not on the same level as painting, sculpture, architecture, literature, film and music.

Erik.

 

[ptpdprinter]

Commenting on images is problematic. APUG has two galleries, one where you can only say nice things, and one where you can critique. Hopefully it won't come to that here.

 

[f16sunshine]

RFF is a gear forum.
There are few artists here who are successful.
Maybe some others who might talk about how much money they make from their images... suggesting they are successful artist.

Other than that, the group is gear interested and gear experienced....so the conversation is about gear.

FWIW I've built "art furniture" and funky staircases (in particular) since starting at it 30 years ago.
In my business there are many artists. We also talk about gear... not art or being artists.
Art discussions are usually for the consumers and collectors of the work not the producers of it.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Commenting on images is problematic. APUG has two galleries, one where you can only say nice things, and one where you can critique. Hopefully it won't come to that here.

You have to pay to be able to see this, but getting of classifieds for sale of gear is free under "new discussions" category in addition of the same view of recent classifieds. And then you look at those galleries you realize what most interesting folks (IMO) are visible of Flickr or else for free.

At RFF we have comments allowed anywhere and place for critique does come here:

Critique / Salon / Picks / Most Views

 

[John Lawrence]

Art discussions are usually for the consumers and collectors of the work not the producers of it.

Agreed.

I think it was Oscar Wilde who said:

“When bankers get together for dinner, they discuss Art. When artists get together for dinner, they discuss Money”

John

 

[back alley]

again, to clarify...every line in my OP added up to being a question.
there is not one statement to be found.
i ask because i seek answers.

i'm also curious because this subject pops up here on rff with some regularity (art vs gear) and i am always left with the same question...why doesn't someone here start an art/image centric blog or forum?

 

[f16sunshine]

same question...why doesn't someone here start an art/image centric blog or forum?

What does that place look like to you ?

Talk of ethics and philosophy are here on the forum all the time.

Maybe the question is "What makes an art discussion an art discussion?"

 

[back alley]

we may have those discussions on occasion but seeing as how this discusion keeps coming back i can only assume we are not meeting the needs of the 'we want more art' folks.

 

[dmr]

we may have those discussions on occasion but seeing as how this discusion keeps coming back i can only assume we are not meeting the needs of the 'we want more art' folks.

One reason I keep coming back here is that, compared to the other photo boards I frequent, the quality of the images and the quality of the discussions are much higher than on the other Usual Suspect sites. 🙂

 

[jsrockit]

Why I have to consider myself as an artist if all I want is to be able to talk about art aspects in photography and on this forum?

If you are not self-proclaimed artist you have no rights to talk about art on forums? Are official artists free to enter art museums?

I don't think it is that. However, there are many photographers that do not consider themselves to be into art or to be artists. Many people use photography for practical purposes that have nothing to do with art galleries or museums. I think that is the difference.

 

[Ranchu]

However, there are many photographers that do not consider themselves to be into art or to be artists. Many people use photography for practical purposes that have nothing to do with art galleries or museums.

Many people use photography for impractical purposes that have nothing to do with art galleries or museums, as well. I rarely use the word artist, but even then I add an e on the end to make it even more pretentious.