street & fine art photography

[back alley]

can street photography be considered fine art photography?

can a street photographer be called a fine art photographer?

mostly curious what folks think...

 

[Bill Clark]

Why not?

Kind of my way of thinking:

On Wiki:

“Fine-art photography is photography created in line with the vision of the photographer as artist, using photography as a medium for creative expression. The goal of fine-art photography is to express an idea, a message, or an emotion. This stands in contrast to representational photography, such as photojournalism, which provides a documentary visual account of specific subjects and events, literally representing objective reality rather than the subjective intent of the photographer; and commercial photography, the primary focus of which is to advertise products, or services.“

 

[helen.HH]

Why not ?

If it captures Emotion, draws a viewer in, makes one question or contemplate
then why not be considered ‘fine art’


Haha Bill, You and I were texting and on the same wave length at the same time ... Cheers !

 

[airfrogusmc]

It has been called that by folks more credible than the likes of me. I also say it can be art and those that create it can be artists. The Americans by Robert Frank is considered to be one of the most important bodies of work in the 20th century. Roy DeCarava, Helen Levitt, Gary Winogrand, Henri Cartier Bresson, Joel Meyerowitz, Elliot Erwitt, Robert Frank, Danny Lyon, Bruce Davidson were all artists in my opinion.

 

[jsrockit]

If it is in the art museums and galleries (and it is), then it is art. However, the photographers that call their photography "fine art" tend to be a bit cheesy. Garry Winogrand or HCB aren`t fine art... but they are certainly art. How could it not be considered art?

 

[back alley]

fine art vs cheesy art vs art...let's talk about that!

 

[jsrockit]

fine art vs cheesy art vs art...let's talk about that!

Don`t forget folk art! 😉

 

[Erik van Straten]

Garry Winogrand or HCB aren`t fine art... but they are certainly art. How could it not be considered art?

What is the difference between art and fine art? For me the finest work of Cartier-Bresson is the finest art there is!

Erik.

 

[jsrockit]

What is the difference between art and fine art? For me the finest work of Cartier-Bresson is the finest art there is!

I agree...but it has been co-opted by those photographer that put signatures in their photos that say "Jimmy Williams Fine Art Photography." What I mean is that artists in museums don`t really call themselves fine art. I`m half joking of course.

 

[Ste_S]

If it is in the art museums and galleries (and it is), then it is art. However, the photographers that call their photography "fine art" tend to be a bit cheesy. Garry Winogrand or HCB aren`t fine art... but they are certainly art. How could it not be considered art?

Absolutely. When someones starts calling their photography 'fine art' it's an instant turn off.

 

[Bill Clark]

The goal of fine-art photography is to express an idea, a message, or an emotion.

Now I probably Am not the brightest light bulb around.......

But I define fine art photography as when the photograph evokes pleasant and happy emotions from the person who views the image(s). Certainly there is much more material that can be photographed, as I do some of that, but I mostly photograph people, usually when they are happy.

 

[Yokosuka Mike]

I agree...but it has been co-opted by those photographer that put signatures in their photos that say "Jimmy Williams Fine Art Photography." What I mean is that artists in museums don`t really call themselves fine art. I`m half joking of course.

If it says "fine art" in the signature that just means they used a tripod to make the picture. 😀

All the best,
Mike

 

[Dogman]

"Fine art" photography is, well, pretentious babble. When I hear the term I see kittens and sunsets and rainbows and naked ladies and Corvettes and brides and....

My photography is "coarse art" photography. Or maybe fine art without the i-n-e. Or just plain picture-taking...that's good enough for me.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I have no idea what fine art is. Some I have seen labeled like this is nothing but dross.
To me definition of visual art is something which I'm pleased to look at. Something I want to come and see as print and something which is close to painting. Something I want or don't mind to be on the wall, framed.

Some of Winogrand urban landscapes are good for it.

I meet our ex-company ex-customer recently. He is retired from his job in TV and is full time pro photog. He has studio shared with interior designer. She does use his street photos as decor. Big prints on interior walls. Sold for good money.
If you look at it over internet, might be not impressive. But on prints. He has to update to Fuji dMF to meet size and quality requirements.
http://www.artphotomircea.com/architecture.html
http://www.artphotomircea.com/still_life.html

 

[filmtwit]

So Ansel Adams was a fine Art Photographer?

If it says "fine art" in the signature that just means they used a tripod to make the picture. 😀

All the best,
Mike

 

[airfrogusmc]

If it is in the art museums and galleries (and it is), then it is art. However, the photographers that call their photography "fine art" tend to be a bit cheesy. Garry Winogrand or HCB aren`t fine art... but they are certainly art. How could it not be considered art?

I avoid the term FINE ART 😀

 

[Yokosuka Mike]

So Ansel Adams was a fine Art Photographer?

The finest!

All the best,
Mike

 

[peterm1]

I always thought fine art was when you went to the mall, made some candid shots, and when told by the mall cops to stop, refused and was given a fine. That's my kind of fine art.

More seriously I find the whole art market pretty artificial and problematic. If the art market can be convinced that a specific artist is marketable then his or her art works suddenly become worth much more. Galleries want to exhibit them and high fliers want to buy them. Because potential buyers now see it as a good investment a well as something that they wish to hang on their wall. (That, in principle is the difference between a fine art photo and that photo poster of a female tennis player in a short skirt showing the better part of her backside that was so popular in certain circles back in the 1970's. OK - not quite!).

But in any event it's pure demand and supply in many cases backed by a lot of hype. I am not saying it is not merit worthy at some level - my point being that many others are too. My dad owned a jewellery store and when being philosophical about it (in the privacy of his own home of course) would say something of this sort - i.e. he would say that jewels do not have much intrinsic worth other than that they are pretty, are rare and so people want them. They don't actually do anything other than appeal to people's ego. So at one level they are not worth very much at all - except for our own foibles. Still how many things can we say that about today - fashion labels, perfume, luxury goods in general, truffles, caviar etc.

Still, if someone wants to offer me a million bucks for one of my photos I will gladly burn the negatives (or wipe the RAW file from my hard drive). After pocketing the money they pay me for the image of course.

(Yes - this photo!)

 

[Bob Michaels]

So Ansel Adams was a fine Art Photographer?

I contend that Ansel Adams was a documentary photographer with the goal of informing the public of the beauty and fragility of the southwest natural environment to garner support for its preservation. Very similar to what Walker Evans, Dorothea Lange, and other FSA photographers did but with landscapes rather than people.

He was not a commercial success selling prints until his last few years when he announced he would make or sell no more prints after he filled his current orders. Prior to that he lived frugally on grants and very limited print sales.

 

[shimokita]

Two quotes from "What is Art?" by Leo Tolstoy

"Every artist must know & be confident that what he does has meaning, and is not a passion of the little circle of people among whom he lives."

"Art of the whole people emerges only when a man of the people, having experienced a strong feeling, has need of conveying it others. Art of the wealthy classes emerges, not because of any need in the artist, but mostly because people of the upper classes demand amusements, which are very well remunerated."
_________________

A Note on the Text: "Owing to Tolstoy's difficult relations with the Russian censors in his later years, the first publication of "What is Art?" in any language was Aylmer Maude's English translation of 1898." - Richard Pevear

At the end of the "What is Art?", Tolstoy turns a little introspective, but he makes some fine points along the way...

.