Who here is buying photographs?

[unohuu]

PS, I am guessing that fewer than 10% of folks here have purchased fine art photographs. Right? Wrong?[/QUOTE]

I have as a way to improve my own photography and to look at something that has artistic merit.

Luke

[mfobrien]

I have many of my own prints (and those made by my daughter) hanging, but I have also purchased other's work, too. Usually prints made by other photograpgers are either subjects I don't do or techniques I don't use. Or else it has to be a print that I really, really like. I have given prints away from my own work as gifts, but have not yet tried selling any. Of course, some prints that I would really like to own are too far out of reach for my pocketbook (Weston and Adams).

[Ed Sukach]

PS, I am guessing that fewer than 10% of folks here have purchased fine art photographs. Right? Wrong?

No idea. Why don't you try a survey?

[johnnywalker]

Sebastiao is brazilian.

No wonder I had trouble with his Spanish! :rolleyes:

Here are some more of his photos from the same series. Awesome. However, I'm probably the only guy on the list who wasn't aware of his work.


http://www.zona10.com.mx/autores/Salgado/

[jnanian]

PS, I am guessing that fewer than 10% of folks here have purchased fine art photographs. Right? Wrong?

i'm still trying to figure out what "fine art photographs" are. they all seem to be the same to me ..... photographs.

boring landscape photography = fine art?
not so boring landscape photography = fine art?
photography that mimics some "master's" style = fine art?
portrait photography = fine art?
nudes = fine art?
architectural photography = fine art?
street photography = fine art?
combat/documentary photography = fine art?

... i spoke with one of the managers at the only local pro-shop in my area.
i asked what kind of photographs he took, he said " fine art " and then described how he projected slides of violence onto serene landscapes.

i guess that explains what "fine art photography" is ...

[jd callow]

i'm still trying to figure out what "fine art photographs" are. they all seem to be the same to me ..... photographs.

boring landscape photography = fine art?
not so boring landscape photography = fine art?
photography that mimics some "master's" style = fine art?
portrait photography = fine art?
nudes = fine art?
architectural photography = fine art?
street photography = fine art?
combat/documentary photography = fine art?

... i spoke with one of the managers at the only local pro-shop in my area.
i asked what kind of photographs he took, he said " fine art " and then described how he projected slides of violence onto serene landscapes.

i guess that explains what "fine art photography" is ...

We all have our own ideas of what art is. "Fine Art," to me has become a meaningless label -- like "New and Improved"

For me art is something that exposes, in a unique manner some truth about humankind, be it specific to the individual, culture or the species across time. This leaves nature and nudes near the fringe. I am sure or hope that others have their own criteria.

[photomc]

This could be one reason some have started using terms like 'expressive print' which I think is closer to what most of us do. If someone wants to call it 'fine art' that is OK, I guess. Like you though, mrcallow - sounds more like the latest 'carb free' snack, drink, etc. At least we know that the expressive print is our own interpretation of something we saw...wish we could just bypass the label completely.

[TPPhotog]

Isn't "fine art" just a label used these days by art galleries to hype the price?

I vaguely remember a well known photography magazine in the UK being asked the same question. All they could come up with was it if was a black and white nude it was "fine art" but if it was colour then it's porn. Seems that even the editor didn't know the answer to this one

[roteague]

So I am curious as to how many folks here, on a photography forum, do purchase fine art photography. If you do, high praises to you. If you don't. WHY NOT???

I have not purchased any photographs as of yet; I am a big consumer of "coffee-table" style photography books. However, I am planning on purchasing a couple of prints from APUG members in the new year. At the moment, I am working on getting together a selection of my own prints, to place in a local gallery - it costs me almost $300 from starting with a transparency until I get the final framed 11x14 print (the costs come down dramatically after the first print).

[roteague]

I think the art of marketing, is more important that the making of the art, that is not to say and unskilled photographer will do great if he is a great marketer, but it does embellish the thought that if you have the skill as an artist, it is imperitive to have the skill as a marketer...

Sadly, I have to agree with you. I've visited a number of local galleries on the island, and found most of the work is just plain c**p; ink-jet prints with blown highlights, poor composition and flat lighting. Not sure how much these guys are selling, but I see their prints in galleries all over the island.

One positive note however, I have had a gallery express a need for very large size prints, which I can easily produce (shooting 4x5).