I get insulted every day as a fine art photographer!

Started by ZakemArt, February 08, 2019, 01:04:06 pm

Slobodan Blagojevic

Quote from: Ivophoto on February 08, 2019, 09:22:18 pm
... There is more skill or craft in a painting than in a photo, no?...


Ah, the typical fallacy in comparing photography and painting as arts. Mismatching the centuries. About four, five centuries. Comparing Leonardo's craft with today's skills required for photography (or last century's skills). Painting like Leonardo today today would not produce art, but a copycat at best and forgery at worst. Today's art rarely requires skills. What skill does it take to paint a can of Campbell soup? Or place a toilet bowl into a gallery. Or elephant's dung?

Ivophoto

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 09, 2019, 10:07:25 am
Ah, the typical fallacy in comparing photography and painting as arts. Mismatching the centuries. About four, five centuries. Comparing Leonardo's craft with today's skills required for photography (or last century's skills). Painting like Leonardo today today would not produce art, but a copycat at best and forgery at worst. Today's art rarely requires skills. What skill does it take to paint a can of Campbell soup? Or place a toilet bowl into a gallery. Or elephant's dung?


A bit skewed I'm afraid. Painting is not an art form of the past. Yes, it is older. There is still plenty of skill required to equal contemporary painters, Hockney's swimming pools, Picasso's single line animals or Anselm Kiefers Babylon. To name a few.

rabanito

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 09, 2019, 10:07:25 am
What skill does it take to paint a can of Campbell soup? Or place a toilet bowl into a gallery. Or elephant's dung?


+1

The skill of profiting from the Sine Nobilitate  ;D

Just a little joke

Slobodan Blagojevic

Quote from: Ivophoto on February 09, 2019, 10:23:06 am
...Picasso's single line animals...


Are you kidding me? Actually, now that I mentioned kids.. every 6-year old on the planet can doodle like Picasso.

Ivophoto

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 09, 2019, 10:55:57 am
Are you kidding me? Actually, now that I mentioned kids.. every 6-year old on the planet can doodle like Picasso.


Yeah right.

rabanito

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 09, 2019, 10:55:57 am
.. every 6-year old on the planet can doodle like Picasso.


Wasn't it in NY that they put a chimpanzee to paint with his fingers and sold them as Kandinskies?
A little long ago...

Beautiful pictures BTW

Ivophoto

Quote from: rabanito on February 09, 2019, 11:02:10 am
Wasn't it in NY that they put a chimpanzee to paint with his fingers and sold them as Kandinskies?
A little long ago...

Beautiful pictures BTW



That say more about NYers than about Kandinsky.

KLaban

Basket weaving is a craft popular amongst basket cases.

petermfiore

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 09, 2019, 10:55:57 am
Are you kidding me? Actually, now that I mentioned kids.. every 6-year old on the planet can doodle like Picasso.


Wow...........no more to say on that topic!

Peter

Ivophoto

Quote from: petermfiore on February 09, 2019, 12:40:18 pm
Wow...........no more to say on that topic!

Peter


I'm correct completely flabbergasted as well.


[emoji43]

Slobodan Blagojevic

Quote from: Ivophoto on February 09, 2019, 01:37:53 pm
I'm correct completely flabbergasted as well...


You two seem to overlook the context I said that: single line animals. Even more complex drawings and paintings by Picasso do not require great skills. They do require a concept, vision, idea, etc. Things that make contemporary art art.

Ivophoto

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 09, 2019, 01:48:12 pm
You two seem to overlook the context I said that: single line animals. Even more complex drawings and paintings by Picasso do not require great skills. They do require a concept, vision, idea, etc. Things that make contemporary art art.



The lines of Picasso are not just lines. No normal toddler will draw a Basset so recognizable with one line like Picasso did.
Look at the squirrel, the fox, the leopard or the kangaroo.
Take a look at his buffalo, how he make a synthesis from the animal and rudiments it in a play of lines and planes....

32BT

There is a sense of praise in that, considering Picasso attempted and eventually managed to draw with the open mind and innocent simplicity of a child. He really went full circle except his lines are ultimately drawn with the transcendence, determination, and intuition of a mature mind formed by a turbulent life.

So, yes, a six year old would be able to draw similarly, except the minor differences are exactly the differences between a life fulfilled and the vast horizon of opportunity of the tabula rasa.

Admittedly, the attached drawing was done by an even younger person than the proposed six year olds, and after subtly pointing out that it couldn't actually be, as was his claim, a portrait of me because I have even less hair than that, he took a long and silent look at both his drawing and my hair (or lack thereof), and proceeded to wisely change the subject. You never know what goes on in the mind of a child but there is a certain intuitive wisdom there representing a desirable state of innocence from which true creativity can be spawned. Perhaps Picasso did finally reach a state of nirvana.
Regards,
~ O ~
If you can stomach it: pictures

Rob C

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 09, 2019, 01:48:12 pm
You two seem to overlook the context I said that: single line animals. Even more complex drawings and paintings by Picasso do not require great skills. They do require a concept, vision, idea, etc. Things that make contemporary art art.


Slobodan, quit whilst you think you're ahead!

:-)

OmerV

Painting is not the skill most think it is. It is not a coincidence that forgers can fool even top curators. The Mona Lisa is not known for the brush work, but da Vinici's ideas.

Yet, photographers have long belittled the craft/art (photography) they practice in favor of painting or sculpture etc., which is just odd.

I marvel at Paul Klee's imagination, and that of Helen Levitt. The funny thing is, painting is actually easier to make art with for the simple reason that to most folks, painting is art.

Yeah, I'm with Rob regarding the use of canvas on which to print photographs. Why? And what is so impressive about a photograph that looks like a painting and therefore should be framed as such?

Some(if not all) of Mike Disfarmer's portraits are, hands down, the equal of the best portrait art, painting or otherwise, ever done.


Ivophoto

Quote from: OmerV on February 09, 2019, 05:11:08 pm
Painting is not the skill most think it is. It is not a coincidence that forgers can fool even top curators. The Mona Lisa is not known for the brush work, but da Vinici's ideas.

Yet, photographers have long belittled the craft/art (photography) they practice in favor of painting or sculpture etc., which is just odd.

I marvel at Paul Klee's imagination, and that of Helen Levitt. The funny thing is, painting is actually easier to make art with for the simple reason that to most folks, painting is art.

Yeah, I'm with Rob regarding the use of canvas on which to print photographs. Why? And what is so impressive about a photograph that looks like a painting and therefore should be framed as such?

Some(if not all) of Mike Disfarmer's portraits are, hands down, the equal of the best portrait art, painting or otherwise, ever done.


I don't know Omer. There is a difference between the brush of Van Gogh and the swab of Bob Ross, isn't it?

rabanito

Quote from: Ivophoto on February 09, 2019, 05:31:07 pm
I don't know Omer. There is a difference between the brush of Van Gogh and the swab of Bob Ross, isn't it?

But I think that the point is that most painters are not van Goghs or Velazquez but the equivalent of the people taking pictures with their cellulars.
We should not establish painting as art per se taking as example the few painters (in the whole) that are special.
Painting or photography are the media used to convey an artistic idea. As is sculpting, playing an instrument and even cooking.

Ivophoto

Quote from: rabanito on February 09, 2019, 06:03:24 pm
But I think that the point is that most painters are not van Goghs or Velazquez but the equivalent of the people taking pictures with their cellulars.
We should not establish painting as art per se taking as example the few painters (in the whole) that are special.
Painting or photography are the media used to convey an artistic idea. As is sculpting, playing an instrument and even cooking.


I agree as long as we, photographers, don't find ourselves better than the average painter, just because we use a expensive camera.

rabanito

Quote from: Ivophoto on February 09, 2019, 06:10:58 pm
I agree as long as we, photographers, don't find ourselves better than the average painter, just because we use a expensive camera.


No that's not what I mean.
And the camera is only part of the process. You can surely make art with cellphones as well but most people don't use them that way.

Ivophoto

February 09, 2019, 06:31:01 pm #39 Last Edit: February 10, 2019, 03:14:10 am by Ivophoto
Quote from: rabanito on February 09, 2019, 06:21:28 pm
No that's not what I mean.
And the camera is only part of the process. You can surely make art with cellphones as well but most people don't use them that way.


There is a part skipped in the whole discussion. And that is the piece itself. Is it good enough to surface above mediocrity.

The kind of mediocre painters, ceramicists, sculptures you point to do not create art, craft work at most. It is 'nice' nothing wrong with 'nice' only, it is just 'not'