Is photography art?

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:FRNcb.586236$uu5.95963@sccrnsc04...

NJH wrote in message
...
There are a lot of people who think good art can be obtained through
originality.....Unfortunately, it takes more than originality to be
good....I would rather look at something beautiful that I've seen
many
times
before, than look at something that is ugly, simply because I
haven't
seen
it before. This weird, "taste" of mine manifests itself in the
modern
music.....I think most of it is gastly....I would much rather hear a
symphony or opera that I've heard many times before than to sit
through
some
of the catcalls that pass as modern music......

Hear, hear!

And that's even without getting into so-called "rap music" (now
there's
an
oxymoron if I ever heard one).

Neil

Yes, but I am fond of annoying my musical friends by saying that music
includes 4 things......Beat, Words, Harmony, and Melody...And rap has
three
of them: Beat, words and melody, But modern jazz only has two: Beat, and
harmony....So which is more like music? (I am obviously not a lover of
modern jazz....)

Heh. That's pretty interesting.

I only occasionally like jazz (and not for very long at that), and rap I
can't stand at all. I'm not sure I know what you mean by "modern jazz"--I
don't really know anything about music in a technical sense, and don't
know
whether whatever jazz I occasionally get while roaming the FM dial is
modern
or not.

But I have to quarrel with your "4 things" rule--most of the music I
listen
to is classical and contains no words. Surely that's music anyway? :-)

Neil

Yes....That's true....There is opera....But the words in opera are
definitely not a part of the musical experience....If anything, they
detract, which is why we love operas in another language.......Words are,
however, an important part of popular music, and some popular songs are very
beautiful. (to me, at least)

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:rmPcb.586749$uu5.96374@sccrnsc04...

Gregory W. Blank wrote in message
...
In article q8Ocb.582844$o%2.265711@sccrnsc02,
"William Graham" wrote:

How about the talented artist that abandons his talent and produces
junk
just to make lots of money.....(Picasso is a good example) Is
everything
that he/she produces art? Does a capable artist produce art always?
Again,
is the process important, or just the end result?

Survival I believe is an important concept. I would state that a
balanced
"Artist" can have both worlds, if that is what they choose. That is
fullfillment
and the ability to produce saleable if less than fullfilling work.

Yes, but....If Pacasso picks up a dirty envelope from the gutter and
signs
his name to it, it becomes immediately worth several thousand
dollars....But
is it art? If the process is important, then the dirty envelope has no
process, so it isn't art....So why does it have value?

That's a metaphysical question.

It has "value" because people will pay money for it. It has no more
intrinsic value than any other dirty envelope, obviously.

Why was a length of clothesline tacked to a wall "worth" $7,000.00?
Because
some "artist" well received in artsy circles tacked it there.

Neil


Well.....Not to MY wall, he doesn't....I require some proof of skill before
I'll pay for any work of art.....Sometimes just the skill is enough....I can
spend 30 minutes just staring at that piece of broken bread, or the
wineglass half full of wine in Dali's, "Last Supper". His incredible ability
to use a paintbrush just astounds me.........

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:b4Ocb.580196$Ho3.109288@sccrnsc03...

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
et...

John Stafford wrote in message
...
William Graham wrote:

I spent my working life
operating a very complicated high energy physics research
machine.
I
was
part of a crew of 15 or 20 people who did this around the clock
for
a
living. No two of us operated the machine the same way, with the
same
finesse and ultimate results. It was a complex, and primarily
decision
making process. There is no question in my mind as to its being
an
art.

Oh fer Gawd's sake... It's not up to you whether it was Art. So it
was
complex! Big deal! Is everything that is complex and done in a
unique,
demanding way Art? I think not! Get over it.

Anything that two people do differently, and it can be said that one
does
it
better than the other, is art. [ . . . ]

What utter gibberish.

If you keep pounding the word "art" into some sort of shapeless mush
such
that it no longer has any meaning, what word will you invent to mean
what
"art" used to mean? Or are you so insensible to the concept of real
art
that
you just don't think it's important to have a word for it?

Neil


Answer the question I posed above about the end product being the lone
consideration in the definition, or is the process important.......

The process is important.


Also the
question about the four or five common disciplines....(Painting,
sculpture,
music, dance, and literature) Does art have to be restricted to these
five?

No.

Neil


Ah....Then where do you draw the line? - Operating a high-energy physics
machine can't be art, in your opinion, but art can stray from the above
mentioned five disciplines......So what makes any particular activity art,
in your opinion?

My grandmothers lasagna was an art. But her veal scallopini was a religion.
"William Graham" wrote in message
news:Kb5db.437471$cF.139775@rwcrnsc53...

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:b4Ocb.580196$Ho3.109288@sccrnsc03...

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
et...

John Stafford wrote in message
...
William Graham wrote:

I spent my working life
operating a very complicated high energy physics research
machine.
I
was
part of a crew of 15 or 20 people who did this around the
clock
for
a
living. No two of us operated the machine the same way, with
the
same
finesse and ultimate results. It was a complex, and primarily
decision
making process. There is no question in my mind as to its
being
an
art.

Oh fer Gawd's sake... It's not up to you whether it was Art. So
it
was
complex! Big deal! Is everything that is complex and done in a
unique,
demanding way Art? I think not! Get over it.

Anything that two people do differently, and it can be said that
one
does
it
better than the other, is art. [ . . . ]

What utter gibberish.

If you keep pounding the word "art" into some sort of shapeless mush
such
that it no longer has any meaning, what word will you invent to mean
what
"art" used to mean? Or are you so insensible to the concept of real
art
that
you just don't think it's important to have a word for it?

Neil


Answer the question I posed above about the end product being the lone
consideration in the definition, or is the process important.......

The process is important.


Also the
question about the four or five common disciplines....(Painting,
sculpture,
music, dance, and literature) Does art have to be restricted to these
five?

No.

Neil


Ah....Then where do you draw the line? - Operating a high-energy physics
machine can't be art, in your opinion, but art can stray from the above
mentioned five disciplines......So what makes any particular activity art,
in your opinion?

"BuGz" wrote in
newse8db.437342$Oz4.245948@rwcrnsc54:

My grandmothers lasagna was an art. But her veal scallopini was a
religion.

I'm coming over for dinner.

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:Kb5db.437471$cF.139775@rwcrnsc53...

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:b4Ocb.580196$Ho3.109288@sccrnsc03...

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
et...

John Stafford wrote in message
...
William Graham wrote:

I spent my working life
operating a very complicated high energy physics research
machine.
I
was
part of a crew of 15 or 20 people who did this around the
clock
for
a
living. No two of us operated the machine the same way, with
the
same
finesse and ultimate results. It was a complex, and primarily
decision
making process. There is no question in my mind as to its
being
an
art.

Oh fer Gawd's sake... It's not up to you whether it was Art. So
it
was
complex! Big deal! Is everything that is complex and done in a
unique,
demanding way Art? I think not! Get over it.

Anything that two people do differently, and it can be said that
one
does
it
better than the other, is art. [ . . . ]

What utter gibberish.

If you keep pounding the word "art" into some sort of shapeless mush
such
that it no longer has any meaning, what word will you invent to mean
what
"art" used to mean? Or are you so insensible to the concept of real
art
that
you just don't think it's important to have a word for it?

Neil


Answer the question I posed above about the end product being the lone
consideration in the definition, or is the process important.......

The process is important.


Also the
question about the four or five common disciplines....(Painting,
sculpture,
music, dance, and literature) Does art have to be restricted to these
five?

No.

Neil


Ah....Then where do you draw the line? -

I don't draw any line.


Operating a high-energy physics
machine can't be art, in your opinion,

I've said this repeatedly: ANY activity requiring a modicum of skill may be
an art in some sense, but not in the sense of fine art.


but art can stray from the above
mentioned five disciplines......So what makes any particular activity art,
in your opinion?

Art in any sense at all, or fine art?

Neil

NJH wrote in message
news

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:Kb5db.437471$cF.139775@rwcrnsc53...

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:b4Ocb.580196$Ho3.109288@sccrnsc03...

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
et...

John Stafford wrote in message
...
William Graham wrote:

I spent my working life
operating a very complicated high energy physics research
machine.
I
was
part of a crew of 15 or 20 people who did this around the
clock
for
a
living. No two of us operated the machine the same way, with
the
same
finesse and ultimate results. It was a complex, and
primarily
decision
making process. There is no question in my mind as to its
being
an
art.

Oh fer Gawd's sake... It's not up to you whether it was Art.
So
it
was
complex! Big deal! Is everything that is complex and done in a
unique,
demanding way Art? I think not! Get over it.

Anything that two people do differently, and it can be said that
one
does
it
better than the other, is art. [ . . . ]

What utter gibberish.

If you keep pounding the word "art" into some sort of shapeless
mush
such
that it no longer has any meaning, what word will you invent to
mean
what
"art" used to mean? Or are you so insensible to the concept of
real
art
that
you just don't think it's important to have a word for it?

Neil


Answer the question I posed above about the end product being the
lone
consideration in the definition, or is the process important.......

The process is important.


Also the
question about the four or five common disciplines....(Painting,
sculpture,
music, dance, and literature) Does art have to be restricted to
these
five?

No.

Neil


Ah....Then where do you draw the line? -

I don't draw any line.


Operating a high-energy physics
machine can't be art, in your opinion,

I've said this repeatedly: ANY activity requiring a modicum of skill may
be
an art in some sense, but not in the sense of fine art.


but art can stray from the above
mentioned five disciplines......So what makes any particular activity
art,
in your opinion?

Art in any sense at all, or fine art?

Neil


OK....I'll bite....fine art, if you insist. Somewhere, presumably at some
level of difficulty to learn, you separate fine art from the other arts, or
crafts, if you prefer......I'd just like to know where you draw the line.
How difficult does the medium have to be to learn, before you will give it
the distinction of, "fine art"?
There are people who, (for example) build 1/100 scale ships like the Queen
Mary out of toothpicks......Not glued together, mind you....But interlocked
together by carving little hooks on the ends, or sides.....Is this fine art?
Or, how about Iranian families who spend a whole year weaving one carpet,
which they sell for several thousand dollars, (amounting to their annual
income). Or the mathematician at Duke who spent over 5 years proving that it
only takes 4 colors to color any map in existence. (there can exist no
arrangement of country borders that require more than 4 colors to separate
on a map) And there are many other examples of projects/disciplines that
take years and years of practice and study to learn. Can you quantify the
difficulty of the medium that is required before you are willing to give it
the distinction of, "a fine art"?

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:Ocndb.600021$YN5.443639@sccrnsc01...

NJH wrote in message
news

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:Kb5db.437471$cF.139775@rwcrnsc53...

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:b4Ocb.580196$Ho3.109288@sccrnsc03...

NJH wrote in message
...

"William Graham" wrote in message
et...

John Stafford wrote in message
...
William Graham wrote:

I spent my working life
operating a very complicated high energy physics research
machine.
I
was
part of a crew of 15 or 20 people who did this around the
clock
for
a
living. No two of us operated the machine the same way,
with
the
same
finesse and ultimate results. It was a complex, and
primarily
decision
making process. There is no question in my mind as to its
being
an
art.

Oh fer Gawd's sake... It's not up to you whether it was Art.
So
it
was
complex! Big deal! Is everything that is complex and done in
a
unique,
demanding way Art? I think not! Get over it.

Anything that two people do differently, and it can be said
that
one
does
it
better than the other, is art. [ . . . ]

What utter gibberish.

If you keep pounding the word "art" into some sort of shapeless
mush
such
that it no longer has any meaning, what word will you invent to
mean
what
"art" used to mean? Or are you so insensible to the concept of
real
art
that
you just don't think it's important to have a word for it?

Neil


Answer the question I posed above about the end product being the
lone
consideration in the definition, or is the process
important.......

The process is important.


Also the
question about the four or five common disciplines....(Painting,
sculpture,
music, dance, and literature) Does art have to be restricted to
these
five?

No.

Neil


Ah....Then where do you draw the line? -

I don't draw any line.


Operating a high-energy physics
machine can't be art, in your opinion,

I've said this repeatedly: ANY activity requiring a modicum of skill may
be
an art in some sense, but not in the sense of fine art.


but art can stray from the above
mentioned five disciplines......So what makes any particular activity
art,
in your opinion?

Art in any sense at all, or fine art?

Neil


OK....I'll bite....fine art, if you insist. Somewhere, presumably at some
level of difficulty to learn, you separate fine art from the other arts,
or
crafts, if you prefer......I'd just like to know where you draw the line.
How difficult does the medium have to be to learn, before you will give it
the distinction of, "fine art"?
There are people who, (for example) build 1/100 scale ships like the Queen
Mary out of toothpicks......Not glued together, mind you....But
interlocked
together by carving little hooks on the ends, or sides.....Is this fine
art?
Or, how about Iranian families who spend a whole year weaving one carpet,
which they sell for several thousand dollars, (amounting to their annual
income). Or the mathematician at Duke who spent over 5 years proving that
it
only takes 4 colors to color any map in existence. (there can exist no
arrangement of country borders that require more than 4 colors to separate
on a map) And there are many other examples of projects/disciplines that
take years and years of practice and study to learn. Can you quantify the
difficulty of the medium that is required before you are willing to give
it
the distinction of, "a fine art"?

The fine arts as far as I'm concerned are pretty much limited to the
traditional ones: painting, drawing, sculpture and related procedures as far
as image-producing stuff is concerned.

Cinematography can surely be an art, and a very important one, but I can't
see it as a fine art.

"Art photography" makes pretensions to being a fine art and to some degree
is accepted as such, which makes its categorization more difficult. But
Westons and Adamses will never be regarded as Rembrandts and Michelangelos,
and will never even come close.

Other photos, including lovely images of sunsets, pretty flowers, etc. that
are sometimes presented as "art" by the people who took them, are not art,
fine or otherwise.

Neil

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:Kb5db.437471$cF.139775@rwcrnsc53...
Ah....Then where do you draw the line? - Operating a high-energy physics
machine can't be art, in your opinion, but art can stray from the above
mentioned five disciplines......So what makes any particular activity art,
in your opinion?

You can express anything you like and call it art, but whether is is, in
fact art will be decided by historians, society, the marketplace of ideas.

"jjs" wrote in message
...
"William Graham" wrote in message
news:Kb5db.437471$cF.139775@rwcrnsc53...
Ah....Then where do you draw the line? - Operating a high-energy physics
machine can't be art, in your opinion, but art can stray from the above
mentioned five disciplines......So what makes any particular activity
art,
in your opinion?

You can express anything you like and call it art, but whether is is, in
fact art will be decided by historians, society, the marketplace of ideas.




You can debate this topic forever but the Encyclopedia Brittanica does
consider photography an art. Here is the link:
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article...&query=art&ct=