What is art? And who can be called an artist? What is the job of an artist? A few questions that have racked my brains quite a number of times. Who will have the final say in the given questions? A piece of art may appeal to someone and may totally repel another.
So, should we and more importantly can we leave the question to the witnesses of art, especially when the witnesses are such varied and have such amazingly contadictory perception for anything art. Who was a better artist, vinci, michelangelo or rembrandt. They all existed in the same era, but still had such different styles. And yet there were people who appreciated them. Moving to a more recent era, Picasso, Van gogh or Goya. Also, with such fast changing definition of art, with the contemporary art (the post modern era) coming in picture, no one can really know or give an exact definition of art. And still we think of all these people to be great artists.
So, if we cannot leave the decision to the witnesses of art. I believe there's just one person who remains, and he is the artist himself. A couple of days back, a phrase got stuck in my mind...
"Egotism is the rightful right of every artist".
And I think its as true as you and me. An artist should have full freedom to decide on what he wants to create. What he wants to show through what he sees. I as an artist, see something, I perceive it, visualise a story, a tale to say through it, and then I show this story to the people. This should be my and only my right to decide on what I want to show. I feel a piece of art is an expression that has been recreated by the artist.But why am i suddenly talking about art?Well, its not so much related to the artists I talked about above. It is because I wanted to answer to a question that I have faced myself and have seen a lot of people face. How much editing is accepted in photography? I feel whether a photograph should be photoshopped, edited, cut or pasted is all a photographer's decision. A photographer is an artist and its his decision what he wants to show the people. And when and to what extent he wants to use this right is also his decision. Its about time that the differential treatment meted out to photographers and artists (people who paint, write, act, direct or are associated with any creative field) be erased. I see something and then I visualise something, and its this visualisation that I want to show to people, otherwise I am sure people must have crossed a similar event/place/artefact quite a number of times.
The same photograph may be able to show different moods of mine or the event, by different composition styles, different color patterns or for that matter by keeping different things in focus or out of focus. Each photograph talks as much about the photographer if not more than the story behind it. A photograph is my signature on that event, and I want to keep that unique.
"Egotism is a rightful right of all photographers".
11 comments:
I agree with your argument about photography, even though I have critiqued your use of what I have perceived as 'external tools' for creating your photographs. I think at the crux is the notion that photography is a reproduction of reality whereas art (defined as literature, music, painting etc) is an artist's expression. Your post (and the discussions preceding it) have made me wonder about the burden of the real that we cast onto photography.
Persuassive argument. :)
was troubled with the question "WHAT IS ART?" for a long time....and after much thought, i came to the conclusion that I cannot explain, but experience..it transforms.
:)
Some things cannot be defined but this does not make them less real. Such is art. And yes, any tool usage is possible in photography (skillfully photoshoping is also art in a way I guess). As long as u remain true to yourself. If the make-up is too heavy, the point of art is lost.
well said dude! In my opinion photoshop is just another "tool" used to create a picture. Just like you have face recognition, red eye detection, a better optical zoom in the latest cameras. Somebody can also say that you have to use a simple camera with none of these features in order to keep it real. Where do you draw the line between what is real and what is "enhanced using external tools". And as u said, why is there such a need to draw the line.
@Srav - :)
@Sanchit - your first comment. Thanks a lot for it. And I guess from the likes of it, we have a big army in favor of us now :P
@poocha - "What is art??" I think we are too small to answer that question, atleast I am. And as you said, we can revel in the experience.
@Sve - Exactly my point. Who decides how heavy is the makeup? If i like BnW pictures, so be it, If I like surreal colours, so be it again.
Well written ... but ya its also true that many people deny the use of tools to enhance the pictures :D ...
Art is whatever the artiste wants to portray, but the medium should be acknowledged and labelled honestly
While it is perfectly okay to take "creative license" (a.k.a photoshopping) with photography, what is not correct is trying to pass it off as the original shot..
My two cents on this :)
I think photography is a discovery of art. The coming across of something accidentally beautiful and the photographer's job is to show that to the world, creating a picture for their audience.
>How much editing is accepted in photography?
This common question doesn't map well onto people's reactions to edited images. I think people say there was too much editing when the result is not far enough from reality to be seen as an interpretation or abstraction, but too far from reality to be seen as real (whatever that means). It's analogous to the Uncanny Valley problem film makers have with CGI people http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UncannyValley
Maybe an example of reaction to a hypothetical sunset image will help.
On the "real" side of the uncanny valley: 'Wow, nice sunset.'
In the uncanny valley: "No sunset has never looked like that. You think you can improve on nature?"
On the abstract side of the uncanny valley: "Wow - I've never seen earth and clouds turned into hot liquid."
Obviously, the creator and viewers each get to decide for themselves where an image falls in relation to the valley.
Post a Comment