Bruce Walker wrote: >Zach Arias has been on a roll answering good questions with practical >advice on his Q&A blog. But he really steps out on a limb with this >one I think. > >"And oh dear please . please. For the love of all that is good and >holy about photography please dont be the fine art photographer >that shoots flowers, and dead leaves, and macro shots of bark, and >hang them in your local coffee house. You know what Im talking about. >Photo 101 assignments passed off as fine art. Aint nothing fine art >about that stuff. >Fine. Call me a jerk. You know what Im talking about. Canoes on a >lake. A bike leaning against a red door with a little green ivy >sneaking in the corner. An old mailbox on a dusty road. A model mayhem >beauty queen wearing a Victorian dress and a German gas mask in a >cemetery. A coffee cup on an old book. An HDRed lighthouse at sunset. >An HDRed macro shot of your cats eye. Dont get me started on naked >chicks on train tracks or laying on rocks."
What pretentious twaddle. "Fine Art" is just art that is created primarily for aesthetic purposes. In other words, not "Applied Art": creations that, while they do have aesthetic appeal as a goal, are made primarily for a practical purpose. Any photograph that is made as art (as opposed to, I dunno... rolling up and swatting flies) is Fine Art. The design of the Marc Newson Pentax K-01 is Applied Art. The cute kitten photos you take with it are Fine Art. Whether or not either one is any *good* is a separate and unrelated question. :-) -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
