PeterN
On 12/7/2013 11:20 AM, Savageduck wrote:

Savageduck
On 2013-12-07 15:31:47 +0000, PeterN <peter.newnospam@verizon.net>said:

PeterN
On 12/7/2013 9:53 AM, Savageduck wrote:

Savageduck
On 2013-12-07 14:00:34 +0000, PeterN <peter.newnospam@verizon.net>said:

PeterN
On 12/7/2013 8:34 AM, Savageduck wrote:

<snip>

Not at all the same. the purpose for my definition was to make it clear that a good photo artists was all I was referring to. My definition was ignored because it attempted to preclude arrogant chest thumping, albeit unsuccessfully.

Savageduck
The only arrogance evident here is your elitist stance regarding "good photo artists".

PeterN
The context of my comment was, IIRC in essence, that a good photo artist has a good working knowledge of the capabilities and limitations of his equipment and PP software.

Savageduck
Some pretty mediocre photographers have a good, sometimes very good working knowledge of the capabilities and limitations of their equipment and PP software, and they still produce crappy images. They can call them art, but they remain for whatever reason, crappy images. Some photographers producing extraordinary imagery from their cameras have little technical knowledge of the "art of photography" or post processing, but they have an almost savant ability to capture very good images.

PeterN
Of course it takes more than pure mechanics to create a work of art. My thought is that when an artist has a concept, he must have mastery of his tools to turn the concept into reality.

Savageduck
There are photographs which please my eye, sometimes I can define why I like them, many times there are qualities which are less tangible. Some of those images could well be called art, some are documentary, but are still good photographs, in some cases compelling, sometimes disturbing, but hardly art.

PeterN
What is art?

Savageduck
Art is a creation by an individual intended to invoke an emotional response in the viewer. Not all art is good. Just because we are told it is art, is no reason to place accolades upon the work and its creator, when it is in fact a POS.

PeterN
Is good, well exposed pron, art? Can art be rejected because it is porn?