What is creativity?

It's when you DO know what the word means -- more or less -- and you are seeking fine shadings, personal perceptions and better understanding, that dictionary definitions are least useful. At least, to me. But I think I can see what you're getting at. Correct me if I am wrong:

When faced with a bald and essentially uninformative definition forces you to re-think relationships between words and concepts.
Click to expand...

sort of. i see it as starting from the basics. it expands your perspective, shows you the scope of your questions and concerns, helps you understand the significance of whatever explorations you set out on. definitions can be revisited, of course, but what about it as a starting point?

d.o'k., dictionary's provide definitions, in the plural.
 
For now and the forseeable future, my creativity is best expressd in my career. I'm a chef and have been for a couple of decades now. The important thing is that I know my craft well enough so that I don't need to give much conscious thought to the how to part of it. I can take a bag of ingredients and with out consciously thinking about the process itself, I will end up with lunch/dinner/whatever. And it even will taste good 😀 .
I know this is a broad generalization but, I think creativity happens after the process has benn mastered.
Wheter that leads to art or not, I'm not competent to give an opinion.
Rob
 
Rob has it for my money -- in fact I've just been doing an Amateur Photographer column on this very topic, the similarities between cooking and photography. He and I are mirror images: amateur/professional photographer/chef. I'd be flattered if he's as eager to pick up tips from me as I am to pick up tips from him. The enormous advantage the amateur has is less pressure, e.g. on knife sharpening or film processing.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)
 
"Creativity" is what's at work when a photo is blurry, mis-focused, off-color, too grainy, too contrasty, or otherwise technically improper -- but is still worth seeing.

Caveat: Blurry, mis-focused, off-color, too grainy, too contrasty, or otherwise technically improper photos that aren't worth seeing aren't creative, just inept. Turner Prize and Wexner Award judges don't seem to have learned this yet...
 
Can a digitally taken, digitally manipulated and/or digitally printed photograph be a "fine art" picture or does it have to be film, chemical processing and traditional darkroom ? I'm sure I've read that Leonardo Da Vinci was castigated for employing modern techniques to produce some of his "fine art" stuff. Just wondering ......?
 
Photography is a subjective pursuit. Often, I look at the prize-winning photo in a magazine of exhibit and think to myself, "What the hell makes that so special." On the other hand, in my mind, a recent shot of my granddaughter qualifies as a work of art even though it would never win a photo award. If you shoot a photo and you like it, who gives a rat's rearend if nobody else does? I shoot photos for me, not critics or judges.

I think we tend to get bogged down in over analyzing the craft -- something common to all "artistic" endeavors. Once I was having a drink with a writer well known in some circles when a young man barged into our conversation and demanded to know what the writer was "really saying" in one of his most popular novels ? The author looked at the intruder for a moment and said, "There wasn't any hidden meaning. I was just trying to tell a god damned story! Now get the hell away from me!"
 
pendevour said:
Can a digitally taken, digitally manipulated and/or digitally printed photograph be a "fine art" picture or does it have to be film, chemical processing and traditional darkroom ? I'm sure I've read that Leonardo Da Vinci was castigated for employing modern techniques to produce some of his "fine art" stuff. Just wondering ......?
Click to expand...
I've heard rumors he didn't even grind all his own pigments 😀
I think the question might be better asked: can ephemeral art be Fine Art? I almost used the word "transient" for "ephemeral" but what I'm trying to get at is if it(the art) is only physically present for a brief/limited time how will it be regarded by our descendants? Should there be some longevity to consider? I am not referring specifically to digital photos--I have seen lots of exhibits/installations/performances that other people have acclaimed as Art but those things are gone now.
I'm not sure how to fit that stuff into art. Some of it I enjoyed and will carry in my head for a long time. Some of it I didn't like and don't care if I remember or not.
Most of it was[I think] a waste of time and energy--mine for going to see it; couldn't say what the artist got from it.
Rob
 
Rob,

But surely trying to second-guess the judgement of history is like trying to second-guess fashion. Consider Alma-Tadema: Victorian superstar, obliterated by the 1960s, now coming back.

Cheers,

Roger
 
Roger Hicks said:
Rob,

But surely trying to second-guess the judgement of history is like trying to second-guess fashion. Consider Alma-Tadema: Victorian superstar, obliterated by the 1960s, now coming back.

Cheers,

Roger
Click to expand...

I had to google him--which speaks to your point cuz theres alot of info out there.
Speaks to my point also, I think; the work is physically still around(maybe not all but some any way) for this reassesment to take place.
I am not trying to second guess history's judgement here, I'm certainly stating my own. Similarly: when I was in junior highschool(age12-15), I was assigned to read many books that are now prohibited to be used in the schools around here.
One specific author: Mark Twain. Because he wrote in the vernacular of his time, the school here decided several years ago to not use any of his books in the ameican lit. classes. The major problem was the use of one particular word for the black characters. I find the word offensive and don't use it and object to its use when I hear it--rather too often: we have a bar in the restaurant. But I thought the better choice about Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer woul have been to take the use of that word as a oppotunity to teach some better behavior.
This kind of revisionist stuff bugs me a lot. There was a fairly serious effort to have FDR's cigarette holder removed from a bust of him (in DC IIRC)because "smoking is bad" --going for the simple "answer" instead of the complete one.
Rob
PS: How about a "black diamond" icon for these threads you start? Like the ski slopes--dificult and dangerous but carefully possible and rewarding when you're at the lodge. 😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rob-F
AI is helping me decide whether to buy a Leica M10!
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
2K
Rob-F
Rob-F
A
The Quadrant Model of Gear vs Output
Replies
10
Views
913
Guth
G
A
What is the MOST gear you've ever carried on a trip?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
Ray Vonn 2023
Ray Vonn 2023
peterm1
Through any window....................
15 16 17
Replies
333
Views
18K
JoeV
JoeV
B
The $15,000 Question: what would you get?
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
5K
Gordon Moat
Gordon Moat
Back
Top Bottom