Wikipedia, the on-line encyclopedia says, “Fine art photography refers to photographs that are created to fulfill the creative vision of the artist. Fine art photography stands in contrast to photojournalism and commercial photography. Photojournalism provides visual support for stories, mainly in the print media. Commercial photography’s main focus is to sell a product or service.”
Photography as art has changed over the years since it’s beginnings and, in my opinion, with the increased interest in photography and the making of photographs since digital technology became the mainstay, photography as art interests more and more people.
That art may be nothing more than a screensaver on one’s computer display or shared to an online quorum. And it is not unusual to see a personal photograph framed and hanging on the walls of one’s home.
I have always been interested in art photography and over the years studied the history of photography as well as what is currently being accepted as art in the medium of photography. I find the previous definition interesting because it separates fine art photography from photojournalism and commercial photography.
By the middle of the nineteenth century photographers felt their art should be held in the same exalted status that painters claimed for theirs. Their contention was that it was the photographer, not the camera that made the picture. The goal was, and still may be, to convince not only the art community, but also the community-at-large that photography is art. Then, as now, the discussion may be about whether the different aspects of photography; commercial, photojournalistic, or those created only as personal creative vision should be considered art.
The question we can ask is whether photographs we see only work as “visual support,” or are produced to “sell a product” or as a creative vision?
I have come to think that definitions like those of Wikipedia’s might have changed. Maybe it is the way modern viewers see and use photography. That quickly-snapped portrait of a favorite pet displayed in the owner’s home probably needs an explanation to go along with it, but is cherished enough to be included with the rest of the owner’s art even though some scholar of the arts may disagree.
Remember, photographers are still contending with those critics that hold that only painting and sculpture are art. For me the lines have become blurred, and I see photography as an artistic medium equal to others and I am not altogether sure in categorizing any photographer’s work.
The camera is just a tool that helps photographers be creative and a photographer only needs to decide on their own particular style and what is “created to fulfill the creative vision of the artist.” What that vision is up to the photographer and the audience for whom the image is produced.
Stay safe and be creative. These are my thoughts for this week. Contact me at www.enmanscamera.com or emcam@telus.net.
