Photography: ART or CRAFT?

<p> Is photography an art form or merely a craft? Are photographers artists in their own right, making art with each finished photograph or are we something else? Maybe the fact that practically anyone can snap picture, makes it hard to justify photography as art, no matter how good the final product is. I am very curious to see what the good people of photo.net think about this.</p>

<p>Definitely an Art Form.<br /> A few work at it, study, learn, introspect.....even buy gear....and it shows in the result. But many more just throw money at it.....and that shows in the result too......regards, Bob</p>

<p>Is the Bayeux tapestry and are the Unicorn tapestries (NY museum) the result of a weaver's art or his or her craft?. What if craft is no slight. Hourly wages and guild membership and good patron support...And "Art" is no encomium per se or is it. I call photography more craft than art. Sort of leads me nowhere as an opinion, so I can not help you much Joe. Sorry. aloha, gs</p>

<p><strong>Q) Is Photography an art or a craft?</strong><br>

<br /> A) It is both.<br /> <br /> <strong>Q) Is photography an art form or merely a craft?</strong><br>

<br /> A) I would never, ever sneer at craft as a mere thing.<br>

<br /> <strong>Q) Are photographers artists in their own right, making art with each finished photograph or are we something else?</strong><br>

<br /> A) Whether a person is an artist and or an individual photograph is art needs to be addressed on the basis of each specific work. Primarily we are photographers, we make photographs.<br>

<br /> <strong>Q) Maybe the fact that practically anyone can snap picture, makes it hard to justify photography as art, no matter how good the final product is.</strong> <br /> <br /> A) Someone I really respect who looks at an enormous number of photographs fro ma wide range of photographers has this to say: <em>"Nearly everyone who picks up a camera has one great photograph they have made. The real test is how consistent are they. " </em> <br /> <br /> In my experience those people's whose work (in any field of human endeavor) really stands out tend to be almost brutally obsessive with every nuance and detail in the work<em> </em> they take seriously.<em><br /> </em></p>

<p>By definition, craft is inherently intertwined with insight gained through experience and knowledge.</p>

<p>A craft demands skill. Skilled photographers craft their photographs. Whether the end product is art depends on the viewer.</p>

<p>Occasionally unskilled photographers can produce art. But lacking the craft, they will find it difficult to reproduce this type of work consistently. They depend more on intuition and serendipity.</p>

<p>To me, photography is about the <strong>craft</strong> of creating an image, and the <strong>art</strong> of bringing it to life.</p>

<p>"They depend more on intuition and serendipity."<br>

I really like that answer.</p>

<p>I think it's both(just my humble opinion). There is allot more to photography than just snapping a picture.<br>

I run into this allot of this nonsense where one of my colleagues, or family members, or friends will pick up a camera and say "hey I can do that !" .<br>

However, to consistently produce fine quality images it takes time, experience, business know-how and a whole lot of learning. Although there are some very young talented photographers out there, they are very few. Most of the Masters are well into their 40's and 50's.<br>

As far as photography being an ART form, well one thing I noticed is that people who are artistically inclined, or who have "The Eye" will have a much easier time in this field than people that don't. That does not mean that a person who does not have these qualities cannot be a good photographer, with practice anything is possible.</p>

<p>To me, photography can be used in 2 ways. To pay the bills, or to elevate the Arts. You still have to know what you are doing no matter whichever way you choose to take it to. </p>

<p>Like many art forms, a mastery of the craft helps to facilitate the message in the artistry.</p>

<p>Re: Lex's 10:14pm comment about Serendipity.</p>

<p>Never forget the adage "luck favors the prepared mind." That's one reason why really great to really good photogrpahers of all stripes seem to be constantly produce stunnign work: they are constantly working at their craft (which goes beyond manipulating the various technologies involved) and consciously and unconsciously preparing themselves even down to deciding how they are going to dress to take advantage of serendipity when it presents itself and this allows then to realize opportunites that other photographers miss.</p>

<p>Read <strong>"On Being a Photographer: David Hurn in conversation with Bill Jay"</strong> . It will be the best $14.00 you will ever spend on a photography book.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>maybe there is no answer. makes me think about back in high school when we had to take a class called "Arts and Crafts" seems no one could make a distinction back then either</p>

 

<p>If done by a craftsman it is craft, if by an artist, art.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Maybe the fact that practically anyone can snap picture, makes it hard to justify photography as art, no matter how good the final product is.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It doesn't work out quite like that; it is not hard to paint a painting, write a short story or learn to play a piece of music. Yet it is really hard to do these things well and simultaneously be able to express something in the way art does. My opinion is thus that the difficulty of producing anything remotely recognizable with the medium is no criteria for whether art can be created with the medium or not.</p>

 

<p><strong>"...</strong> <strong>and consciously and unconsciously preparing themselves even down to deciding how they are going to dress to take advantage of serendipity when it presents itself and this allows then to realize opportunites that other photographers miss."</strong><br>

<strong></strong><br>

So true Ellis. Didn't think of it much but it is interesting you mentioned the "dress" part. A dear photographer-friend whose work I admire very much just discussed with me a while ago how we should dress for a photo occasion. She also seems to encounter "serendipity" a lot. :). </p>

<p>Mary</p>

 

<p>Given that a recent Turner Prize winner's work included screwed up sheets of A4 paper and blobs of blutak, I'm going with the camera for both options, explained so eruditely above</p>

<p>L.J But as you said, it was called arts <strong>and</strong> crafts not arts/crafts. I cant answer the question but I can say that if an artist draws a squiggle on a piece of paper it is not necessarily art. Also someone very good at their craft can produce a wonderful work of art.</p>

<p>Craft is the portal to art.</p>

<p>Anyone working at any craft can produce a piece that qualifies as art, and contrariwise a number of folk representing themselves as artists are actually full of craft.</p>

<p>Pay attention to Ellis. I think he's exactly right. (He must be "very insightful") ;)</p>

<p>By the way, the same question can be raised about any "art" - there's music and Muzak, painting and illustration, and so on.</p>

<p>Interesting thread. I don't think there is a distinct line between art and craft, though craft is often strongly focused on technique, art more focused on the intent or perception of the practitioner and the viewer. Craft has been called the poor cousin of art. The object of craft (no pun intended) is generally to produce more-or-less useful or decorative objects and often utilizes now obsolete technology (think of pottery, glass blowing, wood carving). The appeal of this old technology is that it allows the individual to control the entire creation process, making objects that are unique as opposed to mass produced.</p>

<p>There are many crafts-persons who produce great art. A potter of my aquaintance, who is both artist and craftsman, once said the nice thing about craft is that you can have more fun with it, thus freeing yourself of the some of the baggage that accompanies art. Where art and craft coincide is in the eye - or hand - of the viewer, in the sense that both involve a sort of dialogue between the artist/craft-person (clumsy word!) and whoever encounters their work.</p>

<p>Photography is probably both - or niether. If you are at all serious about it, you need to understand some aspects of the technology. Gaining more control of technique until it is second nature gives you at least the potential to produce art.</p>

<p>For all that, there is little profit in wondering whether the picture you are about to take is art or not, or trying to think of how you can make it more like art. Hopefully while you are mastering the technique you are also developing your "eye", so you can follow your intuition, and make creative decisions without being self-concious about it.</p>

<p>Well, that is my 2 cents. I had not intended to go an at such lenth, and hope the above doesn't sound like art-school prattle!</p>

<p>JDM, we do indeed pay careful attention to Ellis. Your perception of him is very insightful and exactly right.</p>

<p>I agree with George above in that i have always viewed craft as the physical act of creating a finished image on paper while the "art" of it happens behind the lens. I must admit though that I was a Studio Art major in college (bookbinding, which i view as a craft) and I sell my "art" on a craft website (etsy). I don't see my own work as being hugely thought provoking and museum worthy. I do think though that from a craft sense they are nicely composed and pleasing to look at. I think of myself as an exceptional craftsman, and a fair artist. </p>

<p>My teachers always told other teachers and principals that i needed to be very carefully watched.</p>

<p>Insight (i.e., his opinions are the same as mine) <em>and</em> modesty. Wow. Whadda guy!<br>

I have to say that I am pleased that this forum has not gone the direction of many of its forebearers.</p>

<p>Could that have anything to do with which forum it is on or, more to the point, which one it is not on, he asks mischievously.....?</p>

<p>Here is my fortune cookie definition of art: you know its art when the little hairs at the back of your neck stand up.</p>