Photography Asked on March 2, 2021
This question is not as opinion based as the title suggests. Airbrushing, image manipulation and stitching have all been around since almost the birth of photography as we know it. I can’t help but wonder how purist, if at all, a photograph has to be to remain a ‘photograph’.
I am aware that for many this is an arbitrary point about a highly subjective media, so I am only really interested in answers supported by official photography organisations or any governmental distinctions between the two for taxation purposes or similarly letigious reasons.
Photography, like any other art form, becomes art at the hands of the artist and in the eyes of the viewer. It doesn't matter if it's digital or analog. The type of camera or equipment used will not make it Art. Art is the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
Nowadays, the photographic community tries to make the distinction between manipulated and unmanipulated imagery, so as to define a line between "digital art" and the digital artist, but the means, to the end, is just a tool. If one says a camera is a recording device and thus records just what it sees, they clearly have no concept of what it takes to make a camera and the programming behind the look each company is using to differentiate themselves from the next.
Some photo contests differentiate their types of photographic art this way:
WPPI
PPA makes no such distinctions in their rules. So if it's printed and you made the original exposure and it's the right size, you're good to go.
AIPP is the same as PPA in that they don't distinguish the differences.
Neither of the distinctions above change the artistic impact of an image. That comes from the photographer. How they chose to record it, what equipment they liked or had on them, and how they made their creative decisions.
When your talking to the tax people, you take their rules and see what fits. When it comes to photography though, all great photographers are artists, and recognized as such by the art community. How they do their taxes is probably a very different matter entirely.
Correct answer by R Hall on March 2, 2021
Digital art is still generally considered a photograph if it is based on a photo and still uses mostly the imagery of the photo. It is not a documentary photograph, but that distinction is mostly made for photo journalism rather than photography as a whole.
Photography and digital art are not mutually exclusive media as your question suggests. Photography as art is rather a form of digital art, but only one of many. In fact, one of my majors in college was Electronic Media, Arts and Communications and it covered a wide variety of topics including standard audio/video production as well as some photography. It is entirely possible for a heavily modified photo to be a photograph and not art. It is equally possible for a completely unmodified photo to be a beautiful work of digital art.
The only officially recognized distinctions would exist in the realm of news media and what they accept as photos portraying real life. Even that is generally more of a general guideline that the industry holds itself to rather than a set standard though. There isn't really a good way to characterize what is or isn't modified too much to be a photo just like their isn't a good way to measure what is or isn't art.
Rules for various news media organizations may prohibit certain techniques, but that doesn't mean the use of those techniques makes it art or makes it not photography, just that it makes it unsuitable to the standards of that particular organization that may be choosing to err on the side of caution. A good example to look at might be the standards that Reuter's uses for their photo journalism, found here.
Answered by AJ Henderson on March 2, 2021
In the days before digital cameras photographers aimed to capture the image in camera as much as possible and then pictures were manipulated in the darkroom or on the airbrusher's bench. There were specialist darkroom workers and airbrushers but there were also photographers who did all three.
Nowadays in the post digital era all the darkroom and airbrushing work has been transferred onto digital platforms, the computer and manipulation software such as Photoshop. The same rule applies as before. Some photographers aim to capture the image in camera but many others take simple images and make composite images on the computer or get retouch artists to do it for them.
Photographers are now having to adapt to the new technology because not to do so is to be left behind because Photoshop and other software makes the impossible possible and so not to adapt creates a vacuum which competitors will fill making the non conformist look old fashioned and inept. Photographers can't stick their heels in the mud and say I'm not changing because the consumer expectations change with emerging technology. This means at the professional level, you adapt or fail.
Answered by user25107 on March 2, 2021
Get help from others!
Recent Answers
Recent Questions
© 2024 TransWikia.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP