This is mostly from another forum I post on. I have condensed it some and some are out of context.. Your comments and opinions are welcomed and appreciated..thanks DD Photo Manipulation..is it Art? I've had many a day where I questioned myself and the artistic validity of my photography. Most of my career, 35 years behind the lens, photography wasn’t considered an art form. Anybody could take a picture, the masters were just then, at that time, being noticed. It is now gaining more and more respect as an art medium among the institutions , the galleries, and the art critics. A medium in which, when in the right hands, art is actually created. I saw 5 or so old Buicks standing vertical on their hoods in the desert and still haven't made up my mind on that being art! It certainly was created! An image can be captured using various personal techniques, be somewhat molded, shaped, all from a visualized idea with in the artists mind. I have always used lighting, camera angles, various lenses, and other set-ups to create my art, staying away from the new digital manipulation software. I do use color correction and other basic software tools but seldom do I add or take anything away from my images. I might smug out a small artifact once in a while when an image is just to precious to delete. I’ve read tons of opinions on this subject. I always considered my image as art, because I created it, and if I did ever manipulate it with software I would never consider that cheating or un-ethical. I would never use someone else’s images to create something and call it my art…that’s a whole different story-I don’t believe in that. I created the image below a year ago from one of my images. It had unique lighting, a slow shutter gave it a soft effect, and the grasses were blowing in the wind so they were blurred somewhat before editing. I then filtered it in Adobe Photoshop and rendered a brush effect. Then I printed it as an 8x10 on canvas..my wifey loves it. Well there are a lot of new programs out there and I’m self-shopping for Christmas. I want to do more of this type work, it is fun. But also marketable, the cannabis images are quite unique when manipulated. While Googling today I found a review on the ethics of this that made more sense than any I’ve read before, I’d like to share that link with you. I encourage you read it, think it will be helpful for those wavering, as I've been, on this topic. This is Catching the Light, The Ethics of Digital Manipulation by Jerry Lodriguss, I encourage your reading it: http://www.astropix.com/HTML/J_DIGIT/ETHICS.HTM My images: I do consider photography as art, I hope I didn't mis-lead you. I've always considered it an art form, and I consider my manipulation an art form as well. I believe when it comes to digital image manipulation I consider it art as long as the artist is using images he created..but am I an artist? Of course with-in the context of the definition of art the Buicks are art, but is he an artist because he created it? Dictionary.com definition of artist: –noun "art·ist 1. a person who produces works in any of the arts that are primarily subject to aesthetic criteria. 2. a person who practices one of the fine arts, esp. a painter or sculptor. 3. a person whose trade or profession requires a knowledge of design, drawing, painting, etc.: a commercial artist. 4. a person who works in one of the performing arts, as an actor, musician, or singer; a public performer: a mime artist; an artist of the dance. 5. a person whose work exhibits exceptional skill. 6. a person who is expert at trickery or deceit: He's an artist with cards. 7. Obsolete . an artisan. " I consider myself an artist when manipulating my images because I created the original image. I then use software tools to further express my vision. The person that stood the cars on end did not manufacture or create the cars, but he used a tool, the backhoe, to express his vision. I used to do art shows along side a guy I considered very talented. He would cut out headlines, story headers, and images from old magazines and newspapers. He then would put together collages of them, organize them in unique ways. Then layer it with several coats of lacquer and frame it. He out-sold me at many a show, it drove me crazy! I thought highly of him as talented individual..but never could bring myself to call him an artist. He was taking something someone else created to create his work. I think it is how each person looks at it-a grey area-not defined for sure. Discussed in the link I provided. DD To better clarify the thing that bothers me the most. A lot of great works of art, paintings etc, are now public domain. They can be used by anyone. Their respective creators have passed away or the copyrights have expired on them. I see peeps simply tweaking one of these great creations with a software program, then after one click of the mouse, they then call it "their art". I realize there is some creative process going on but so very little experience is needed for this type of work I can't categorize them as artists, nor see any talent in doing this type of manipulation....I don't think there is much talent in doing my manipulations..most of the talent was in the creation of the original image. Now if they reveal the piece was done in this way, give credit to the original creator, that softens my attitude somewhat..smiles.. I do believe removing certain objects from an original then blending them to create your own work may be art, but I then contradict myself from what I stated earlier about the collages guy...isn't that what he is doing Doobie? Edit: I pondered a bit more last evening and came up with, if the public looks upon your work as art they then may consider you an artist-regardless of what the parameters are or critics say. An example I used when a image artists website turned down my work "Capitol Records turned Garth Brooks down once..they didn't recognize how great an artist he could become." A better example for alll of you viewing this thread, and thank you for doing so. This is my one-click art. The original I shot on a photo trip to Northern Ca. It is almost a sepia tone though a color image. My perspective and knowledge of photography helped me choose the place to shoot from, the camera angles, lenses, exposure etc. I then used new software I just purchased last night for this thread to edit it. With ONE-CLICK of my mouse I created the other image, a work of art? Is it art if someone else, with no experience as a photographer, or PC savvy, buys a computer, buys the software, uses my image, and then on his first day creates this and calls it his art? Certainly changed drastically from the original: a copyright attourney might argue! Ethics certainly plays a huge part in the equation and I'm not sure I can wrap my head around that yet. DD
I think art is more of a spectrum than a yes or no. Writing a little rhyme is art, but it's nowhere near the skill or complexity of writing a great novel with lots've subtext. I would consider photo manipulation's artiness to depend greatly on just what is being manipulated. If you are doing touch-up, I would see it as lower end, if you are basing a computer-generated creative image off of a photo. Yours I would probably consider in the first category, as it looks like you just used filters and the computer did most all of the work.
you consider yourself an artist, but not the man that took other people's creations and cut & pasted to create something entirely different. but aren't you doing the same thing with photography? you're capturing something you didn't actually create with your camera. now, i'm not saying you're not an artist. i consider photography art. i used to do a lot of photomanipulation with Photoshop. I didn't use filters or anything either. but most of the time i didn't use my own photos. I'd take stock pictures, crediting the original artist, and cut and paste to create something entirely different from the original pieces. I also consider that art. oh, i draw and paint too. i'm decent at it. i rambled. but i agree with duck, too.
Duck many thanks my fine feathered freind. I like your spectrum idea. WA..no, don't think so. Yes I am capturing something I didn't create. But I am in fact creating something original... an image that didn't exist before, a one of a kind. You've got me pondering again..soon I'll start rambling. Thank you for your input..DD
Id say its art, possibly in the graphics design area. Ive made signatures and would like to think of them as art pieces, art is anything a person makes it out to be.
op, look up the artist "MBW"/"Mr. Brainwash". he is a good example for this thread. after following around numerous famous street artists, he decided to make his own art. his first museum exhibition was all made very very quickly and made a big success financially. most of the pieces were altered pieces of pop stars and typical graffiti-style images which most artists don't feel his works are genuine. he would throw together an "artwork" very quickly almost mechanically like it was just a factory process, and then duplicate it. although his legitimacy as an artist is questionable, it makes us question how we perceive art, what makes an artist an artist, and what realistically stands out (money, bigness, color, and fans). art is anything that inspires. image manipulation is definitely art, but when it comes down to prices for artworks, the prices should reflect how much the materials costed along with the prestige of an artist. see now with mr brainwash, he would sell a photoshopped image for 100$ or so when for him it only costed the price of the paper and printer. there is that aspect of paying for the prestige and originality of the artist, but for someone like MBW, he was brand new, and ripped off a lot of people (subjective).
this is a picture of a friend of mine. i then put it through photoshop and edited it to pieces. it's 3 years old now. photomanipulation is sooo much fun and so great to mess with. i edit a lot of pictures just by changing contrast and editing out distracting scenery or something like that. with this picture i changed the nose and lips, added the stitches as a transparent layer and added green and yellow transparent layers to everything. it's amazing what you can do with programs.
