Becoming an 'artist'

[bhop]

My camera bag has loose threads and some holes, and is pretty dirty (domke canvas), I never use the stock camera straps, I painted my Leica dot black, I shoot b&w film, smiling's for suckers.... I'M AN ARTIST!!

 

[The_Traveler]

Well, it is clear that some people here are well on the way towards being seen as artists.
I hadn't thought to mention the mental disease as everyone here seems to have passed that particular barrier already.

 

[runnah]

I hadn't thought to mention the mental disease as everyone here seems to have passed that particular barrier already.

You'll have to narrow it down a bit.

 

[The_Traveler]

I hadn't thought to mention the mental disease as everyone here seems to have passed that particular barrier already.

You'll have to narrow it down a bit.

Whatever the diagnosis, there isn't any cure so it doesn't make any difference.

 

[runnah]

I hadn't thought to mention the mental disease as everyone here seems to have passed that particular barrier already.

You'll have to narrow it down a bit.

Whatever the diagnosis, there isn't any cure so it doesn't make any difference.

I've heard large doses of reality and perspective, in equal measures, can work wonders.

 

[pixmedic]

I was not going to even touch this one...'cause of my feelings on "art"...
but damnit Lew, that was so close to my heart it hit me right in the feels man.
So, here we go.

Artists....Pfffffffft.

yup. Pfffft.

It is often the battle cry of the photographer who doesn't think they need any lighting equipment or posing techniques, or processing skills and then cant take critique. they didn't make "mistakes", it was their "artistic choice", and the hell to everyone who doesn't agree with them....they obviously just don't understand "art".

I admit im biased. I just don't find 95+% of photography to be all that "artistic", and i mean that in the sense of when I think of "art" I think of something more "hand made" than a picture. I think of sculptors, or painters.
I consider most photography as "art" in the same way i consider a piece of driftwood plucked from the beach and placed directly on the wall as "art", or a white piece of paper with paint randomly splashed on it.
They might all be pretty. They all might sell for tons of money. but I don't consider them real "art".
Some random person photographed outside on train tracks or against a brick wall (and probably converted to B&W) just doesn't count as "art" to me.

I think too many people hide behind the vestige of "artist".
I would much rather be considered a craftsman than an artist.

 

[rexbobcat]

I was not going to even touch this one...'cause of my feelings on "art"...
but damnit Lew, that was so close to my heart it hit me right in the feels man.
So, here we go.

Artists....Pfffffffft.

yup. Pfffft.

It is often the battle cry of the photographer who doesn't think they need any lighting equipment or posing techniques, or processing skills and then cant take critique. they didn't make "mistakes", it was their "artistic choice", and the hell to everyone who doesn't agree with them....they obviously just don't understand "art".

I admit im biased. I just don't find 95+% of photography to be all that "artistic", and i mean that in the sense of when I think of "art" I think of something more "hand made" than a picture. I think of sculptors, or painters.
I consider most photography as "art" in the same way i consider a piece of driftwood plucked from the beach and placed directly on the wall as "art", or a white piece of paper with paint randomly splashed on it.
They might all be pretty. They all might sell for tons of money. but I don't consider them real "art".
Some random person photographed outside on train tracks or against a brick wall (and probably converted to B&W) just doesn't count as "art" to me.

I think too many people hide behind the vestige of "artist".
I would much rather be considered a craftsman than an artist.

On the same token, though, I think a good portion of man-made post-modern art meets your criteria of non-art as well. I take it on an individual basis, because I think it's difficult to distill a craft/art down to whether its principles and practices are or aren't art.

 

[pixmedic]

I was not going to even touch this one...'cause of my feelings on "art"...
but damnit Lew, that was so close to my heart it hit me right in the feels man.
So, here we go.

Artists....Pfffffffft.

yup. Pfffft.

It is often the battle cry of the photographer who doesn't think they need any lighting equipment or posing techniques, or processing skills and then cant take critique. they didn't make "mistakes", it was their "artistic choice", and the hell to everyone who doesn't agree with them....they obviously just don't understand "art".

I admit im biased. I just don't find 95+% of photography to be all that "artistic", and i mean that in the sense of when I think of "art" I think of something more "hand made" than a picture. I think of sculptors, or painters.
I consider most photography as "art" in the same way i consider a piece of driftwood plucked from the beach and placed directly on the wall as "art", or a white piece of paper with paint randomly splashed on it.
They might all be pretty. They all might sell for tons of money. but I don't consider them real "art".
Some random person photographed outside on train tracks or against a brick wall (and probably converted to B&W) just doesn't count as "art" to me.

I think too many people hide behind the vestige of "artist".
I would much rather be considered a craftsman than an artist.

On the same token, though, I think a good portion of man-made post-modern art meets your criteria of non-art as well. I take it on an individual basis, because I think it's difficult to distill a craft/art down to whether its principles and practices are or aren't art.

I absolute agree.
which is why i mentioned the "white paper with paint just splashed on it".
I find a huge portion of post modern art to be tacky, ugly, and devoid of any real artistic talent.
It seems to be mostly comprised of people whose sole artistic repertoire consists of an amazing ability to perfectly imitate a monkey flinging poo.

 

[The_Traveler]

I absolute agree.
which is why i mentioned the "white paper with paint just splashed on it".
I find a huge portion of post modern art to be tacky, ugly, and devoid of any real artistic talent.
It seems to be mostly comprised of people whose sole artistic repertoire consists of an amazing ability to perfectly imitate a monkey flinging poo.

You do have to accept, because it's fact, that every change in the concept of art and its execution was met with mass public disapproval.
So there is a good possibility that in some cases your judgement is just plain wrong.

Without discussing religion, I quote Jude 1:10: " Yet these people slander whatever they do not understand".

and Andrew Smith (author of Dr Who)
“People fear what they don't understand and hate what they can't conquer.”

 

[pixmedic]

I absolute agree.
which is why i mentioned the "white paper with paint just splashed on it".
I find a huge portion of post modern art to be tacky, ugly, and devoid of any real artistic talent.
It seems to be mostly comprised of people whose sole artistic repertoire consists of an amazing ability to perfectly imitate a monkey flinging poo.

You do have to accept, because it's fact, that every change in the concept of art and its execution was met with mass public disapproval.
So there is a good possibility that in some cases your judgement is just plain wrong.

Without discussing religion, I quote Jude 1:10: " Yet these people slander whatever they do not understand".

and Andrew Smith (author of Dr Who)
“People fear what they don't understand and hate what they can't conquer.”

by the same token, you have to accept, because its fact, that even tho something might be accepted by mainstream culture as "art", it does not mean any particular person has to like it, or even feel it is based on talent. I don't have to understand something to decide whether i find it visually appealing or not.

"I dont know art, but I know what I like" James Thurber.

see, I can quote people too.

actually, I think Orson Welles said pretty much the same thing too.

 

[The_Traveler]

Right, you don't like it - and that's quite different from the fact that it isn't art.
I don't like Scotch but I don't think, and wouln't presume to say, that people who say they do like it are crazy, stupid or fakes.

Perhaps if you knew more then you would appreciate more - and even like some.
Just like hard liquor, cigars, mushrooms, wines, etc.

 

[pixmedic]

Right, you don't like it - and that's quite different from the fact that it isn't art.
I don't like Scotch but I don't think, and wouln't presume to say, that people who say they do like it are crazy, stupid or fakes.

Perhaps if you knew more then you would appreciate more - and even like some.
Just like hard liquor, cigars, mushrooms, wines, etc.

I dont believe I ever said that it wasn't art, as in a factual statement.
I also dont believe i ever said anything about people who do like art.
i think i only made statements concerning my own personal opinion.
while you might not presume to speak of people who drink scotch, you have presumed an awful lot about what you think I do and do not understand.
there is plenty of art I like. and plenty of modern artists that produce great work.

perhaps your own conceptions of art , or your perception of the artistic value of your own work have simply given you artistic "tunnel vision"

I find craftsmanship to be far more beautiful than artistic license.

 

[The_Traveler]

You're the one who was so outraged about 'art' that you had to rant about modern art.
Relax.

 

[pixmedic]

You're the one who was so outraged about 'art' that you had to rant about modern art.
Relax.

I was just responding to your rant.
Chill.
I assume that's what you were looking for people to do. That was far from outrage.
Not sure what gave you the impression I was angry.
Maybe your just projecting.

Steady on son, steady on.

 

[minicoop1985]