ANSWERS: 39
-
Yes. Most, if not all photography is art.
-
Definitely.
-
It is already an art. It is the beauty of life.
-
Well, I guess just about anything can be considered art. But, I absolutely consider photography as art.
-
Photography is an art medium.
-
Photography is so great, so full of scope and wonder that it can be called just about anything and Art is definately one of those things.
-
Definitely! A lot of people play down photography as an art form these days because digital cameras make it easy for anyone with a creative eye and a good imagination to do... but it's still art, IMO.
-
absolutely, it is a form of art.
-
Last time i looked!
-
Absolutely.
-
Yes.
-
Yes, I have some great pics that I have taken and blown them up and framed them and have them hanging in my house.
-
It can be. Finding the right shot, at the right angle with the lighting just so, in order to produce a desired effect. It isn't always though. I take pictures sometimes, and they are most certainly not art.
-
"Beauty is in the eye of the Beerholder" ;))
-
without question......
-
It surely is :)
-
Of course it can be art. As a photographer, I view photography as being able to capture the way you view the world. It's absolutely beautiful. =]
-
I've always considered photography as an Art.
-
ABOLSUTELY! Ask Steichen!
-
Yes, art is subjective. It is one of those arguments that will never be settled - because, as I said, it's subjective. I personally consider photography art. Sometimes people do it on purpose, other times the result is a complete accident. Regardless, it is a form of art.
-
definitly... i draw and paint but i also like photography a lot, its like creating a picture without having to draw or paint it. plus its really fun to use graphics these days! :)
-
It's not one of the seven arts... but neither is sculpture. For me, it is the artist and not the medium that decides what is or is not art.
-
The definition of ART is that it has no purpose other than enjoyment, so YES, some genres of photography ARE art, others are not. eg, journalistic, documentary photography. (Although some would argue that documentary CAN be art. Cartier-Bresson successfully carried off both)
-
Absolutely. It's my favorite media.
-
Absolutely! In order to have a really beautiful photograph, a lot of elements of other forms of visual art are necessary.
-
In my opinion it can and if you disagree see Ansel Adams. "Love of beauty is Taste. The creation of beauty is Art". -Ralph Waldo Emerson http://www.anseladams.com/
-
My approach to photography is to make sure that the thing I am interested in is in the middle of the picture, that none of the edges is left out, that the exposure is correct, and that what I am interested in recording is in focus. This is not art. My wife takes photographs of the things she sees, constructing designs to be looked at for themselves. She is not interested in recording identifiable objects in particular places. Her photographs are the result of art. You are meant to look into my photographs, as though through a window: you are meant to look at hers.
-
Yes it can be, but it usually is not. Photos of crime scenes, of bones in a body, or mug shots etc. After months of lessons in painting, photography to me is turning into more a craft that can be an art or isn't. I can only judge each photo personally and then decide. Answered using my personal definition of art. Former professional photographer. :-( http://www.CurtisNeeley.com
-
I have wondered. I think it's an art - but does it meet the same mark as, say, sculpture or painting or playwriting? I dunno - and I'm a photographer. :-)
-
Yes i think so not everyone can take a great picture, it does take skill
-
photography would be counted as art, even tho it is not hand drawn doesn't mean it is not art, you still have to aim the camera and do all this other stuff. so it is art.!
-
Yes it can, and I know a young man just out of high school who has all the makings of a professional photographer. His composition and lighting are great.
-
Of course Alfred Stieglitz. Just look at these and you can see the art. http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=Alfred+Stieglitz.&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=vaKzSuqkDdDQlAeK-Zj9Dg&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1
-
Google Ansel Adams.
-
Of course it can.+5
-
I was once told by someone that you actually have to make something with your hands in order for it to be art. This person was trying to convince me that things made on a computer cannot be art. I suppose this would also apply to photography as well. I don't buy that though. As far as I'm concerned, art can be virtually anything, photography included.
-
Anything produced in a communicative medium can be art. It might be bad art though.
-
Definitely. All you have to do to be convinced is to compare a picture taken by one of your colleagues at work and a picture taken by a professional photographer. It's more than technical proficiency though. A photograph can be evocative and capture an emotion, mood, spirit, atmosphere. That's what the great painters were trying to do anyway.
-
Absolutely, the world is your canvas, the pictures you take reflect what you see all around you...yes, it is a great form of art.
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC