To add some context: an example of what I think of when I say conceptual photography, http://aperture.org/store/s06pick-fisher.aspx (found it in another discussion)
On 8/22/07, Fernando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You are making strong points here Godfrey, and I agree with the fact > that without intention there is no art, in the end all this discussion > is about the process of how this intention is communicated from the > artist to its audience. At least from me the critic goes to part of > what is considered art photography (specifically part of conceptual > photography) that demands the viewer to "read" the concept from a > textbook, not read the concept from the piece of art (photos) because > is not there, not even in a cryptic way, you have to read it from > somewhere else. The critic was no to art in general, not from me, I'm > not that extreme ;-) > > On 8/21/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Making art photography is an exercise that is not related to > > accessibility or like-ability. Most people can master a technically > > good photograph with today's cameras. Many people can make a good > > photograph in a compositional sense. Not many produce art. > > > > It is the intent, the expression, and the interpretation together > > that define a piece as art, and also provide a meter as to whether it > > succeeds or fails in the context of the artist's intent. Without > > intent, no photograph is art ... they're all just pretty pictures or > > documentary recordings of a scene. > > > > To look at photographs purely as pretty pictures and insist that they > > must be accessible to all is to miss the vast majority of the ideas, > > emotions, expressions that photographers might wish to convey. This > > saddens me. > > > > There is room for pretty pictures and art photographs in the world to > > coexist. It is not necessary that every photograph be a pretty > > picture, or be a piece of art. And it is also not necessary that > > every piece of art be accessible to every person's appreciation, or > > even if it is, be liked by every person who appreciates it. > > > > If you see a photograph that you don't "get", you can comment, or > > not, as seems fitting. If you want to try to understand it (or more > > specifically, understand the photographer's intent behind it...) and > > expand your ability to appreciate such work, commenting and/or asking > > a question is the only way to go. > > > > Godfrey > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/ferand/ > -- http://www.flickr.com/photos/ferand/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
