Photography, is it an art?

Is Photography Art?

 

People in history have questioned if photography is art. Therefore I am going to debate if in fact it is an art formation. I will show reasons why some people are for and against. Some believe it's too easy to be associated as an art formation, however I plan to oppose this using facts and statistics. I will take a look at some famous artists, use quotes and references to back up my evidence. So what actually is art itself? The Oxford Dictionary would state; "the expression of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power."

Firstly, research shows that in 2011, Facebook was predicted to have had 100 billion photographs uploaded via the social network alone. This figure show us that it's got to the point where online photographs have become that vast we question if photography is even an art rather than just sharing uncreative snaps. This for many people is the main reason why photography can't be an art. I agree not all photography has to be artistic but it still can be used as a technique in creating art. I believe that a camera is a tool, just as a paintbrush is to a painter and the light used to capture an image is just like the paint used to paint artwork. I feel it's hard to understand why so many people are so strongly against photography as being an art form in itself, because it takes just as much direction and time as painting for example. For those who think photography is just aiming a camera and pushing a button, I believe are too uneducated about the process. Photographers take a great deal of effort to plan photo shoots and to find exposures, settings, direct the subjects, perfect the objects, getting the best composition possible or the finding right angles that amateur photographers may completely be oblivious to. It may be true that every painting or sculpture may project a message, emotion or a story but so can a photograph depending on the level of professionalism and imaginative intellect of the photographer. I do agree with people in saying paintings can take a lot more time than certain photographs but what about the planning of photo-shoots, and the process of developing the images. Therefore, Photography is not just a "ONE CLICK" wonder as some people may think because it requires skill, effort and time needed to produce that one final image.
  

 
 
 (Here are two images; the first being an amateur, the second being a more experienced photographer. We can clearly see the difference, I understand people might think that the first image is a simple photograph that needs no talent and that they believe is photography. However, If we look at the second image (although edited), we can see a much more artistic approach.)

What do the artist's think about photography as an art formation? Well Pablo Picasso, one of the most famous artists of his time was known for impacting the world of art and the one who created many important art styles and then destroyed them again in the wave of a brush, once said, "I have discovered photography. Now I can kill myself. I have nothing else to learn." Which for me is an important quote coming from such an inspirational man. He then went on to say, "In every photographer there is a painter, a true artist, awaiting expression." If someone this important in art history thought this, doesn't that mean something? Most people have different opinions for what they perceive art to be saying it requires no imagination at all. Here is a great quote from an important, famous British photographer to oppose these opinions, "It takes a lot of imagination to be a good photographer. You need less imagination to be a painter because you can invent things. But in photography everything is so ordinary; it takes a lot of looking before you learn to see the extraordinary." (David Bailey.) 

 I also feel the need to reference in 2011 Photographer Michael Wolf received a mention in the World Press Photo awards for the images he selected from Google's Street View taken on his computer screen that he cropped and then blew up. Does this make Wolf a photographer? Or what about In 2012 artist John Steaker when he had won the photography prize, 'Deutsche Börse' without taking a single photograph. He works with already made photographs, most commonly shots of forgotten film stars, which he cuts then merges into other stills to make collage portraits what we call surrealism [photography]. Stezaker is undoubtedly one of the foremost people to comment that he's not a photographer, but an artist who utilities photography as a creative technique. One of the most famous fine art photographer masters of all time was Ansel Adams. While his primary focus was on photography as art, some of his work raised public awareness of conserving beautiful landscapes. Here is an interesting response from him; "Not everybody trusts paintings but people believe photographs."

(This is an image of Michael Wolfs work. I think that the left image looks like a photograph even though on the right it can be seen in reality as a painting. I think it's a good example of For and Against, because he has used the art work as a trick into making you think that it was photography even though it was an actual painting. Doesn't this show a good example that they both must be some form of art?)  

So now that I have debated arguments for and against photography as being an art form, we can ask ourselves, Is photography an art? In my opinion, yes because the evidence shows from multiple talented artists that have studied and produced masterpieces of art, who we all trust in knowing what they are talking about when it comes to art. We need to see a different perspective rather than the general people who don't class photography as being an art who maybe to biased and uneducated. I put it to them that photography does require skill, creativity and imagination. That it does take time and effort. So that's why I believe photography is in fact a formation of art.