Back to what I assume (rightly or wrongly) was the initial intention of this post...
To some extent I agree with Jonathon Jones, particularly when he says,
"If this is the most valuable “fine art photograph” in history, God help fine art photography. For this hollow and overblown creation exposes the illusion that lures us all, when we’re having a good day with a good camera – the fantasy that taking a picture is the same thing as making a work of art."
For all we might like to think about ourselves as artists, creating art is more than being at the right place at the right time with the right camera and the right technique. On purpose, I use the the tag line on my website "revealing the art inherent in nature". I'm not an artist if I point my camera at a spectacular natural scene and capture in silicon and on paper for posterity. People may think and say otherwise, but I don't think it is "art".
At the same time, I do not agree with Jonathon Jones' earlier pro-photography editorial (Jan 2013) where he goes on about validating photography - and at the same time limiting its scope - as an art form for its ability to capture human emotion. Yes, it does that well, but photography is also the best art medium for capturing nature's emotions without only minimal human interference - which is where I'm coming from as a photographer. Sure I choose the lens, the angle, aperture, etc., etc., but all of that exists whether I'm standing there or not.
Is it art? Who cares?! I do what I like to do and keep doing it.