Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,338   Posts: 1,537,719   Online: 793
      
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 75
  1. #11
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    Painting is chemistry and physics too.


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  2. #12
    127
    127 is offline
    127's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    uk
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    581
    Quote Originally Posted by BradS
    Well, I just spent the last hour or so using data from Amazon dot com's "Customers who bought this book also bought..." listings to build a directed graph of books related to The C++ Programming Language by Bjarne Stroustrup. So, I guess, that makes me a programming/ statistics nerd.
    Now there's a book I'm glad I don't have to read any more!

    When I worked as a C++ programmer (about 10 years ago) I came to the conclusion that C++ was invented by Bjarne as a stunt to promote his book. Why else would it have so many boobytraps? Completley unfathomable rules about virtual/non-virtual contrutors/destructors. Practically every chapter of the book concludes with a paragraph "You would therefore think you could use the feature we've just discussed in this other very similar way. However it doesn't work, so I added an extra feature to the language to get round it".

    Practically everyone in the company had a copy of that book within arms reach at all times. I came to the conclusion that Bjarne new NOTHING about object oriented programming, and an awefull lot about planning for his retirement...

    Ian

  3. #13
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    "Her educational background was in Art History"

    Thing about Art History is that you either study it because you have a passion for Art, or you study it because its an easy way of getting your parents (or the state) to pay for another 3 years of school without too much effort on your behalf. I think I can guess which of the two groups this person is in.

    By her logic painting isn't art because chemists make the pigments and the brushes are mass produced in factories, Sculpture isn't art because the person just hits bits of rock with a hammer and chisel and... well... it's all just too silly for words. She needs to try putting her brain in to gear before engaging her mouth - but then, why change what I am certain is the habit of a lifetime?...

    Point her at some of Gandolfi's images and see what she says then!

    Cheers, Bob.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Japan
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,957
    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the argument of whether photography is art or not was originated in Walter Benjamn's theory/essay called "The Short History of Photography."

    http://www.litencyc.com/php/speople....c=true&UID=357

    Basically he was concerned about the future of the mass preproduction of images. Compared to painting and everything else that's called art back then( this was 1930's), in his view, it was so questionable to call photography as a method for producing art.

    But more or less, some people talk about photography not being art or whatever, and most of the time that's pure nonsense. I think photography is photography just like craft is craft. But if it goes a step further and becomes more than just photography to someone, then we are talking about art.

  5. #15
    rfshootist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Old Europe
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    387
    Images
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by BradS
    Her educational background was in Art History. , at some point she asserted that Photography is not art. She said that it is not considered art because, in essence, there is no artist.
    Thoughts?
    About her, yes ! :rolleyes: Did she ever try to take a decent photo ? I guess NO !
    This statement is as old as photography is and came up immediately after the first photos were published in the 19th century. The painters and graphic artists in those days expected a competition and from the very first moment on they claimed photography not beeing art, using exactly the same argument as the lady used it now.

    The argument has got neither more intelligent nor less arrogant since the early 19th century, but it is still pretty popular among those pseudo-academic art parvenues, who cannot keep a... from elbow but keep themselves as beiing competent because just they have had some lectures at the university.

    Their natural environment is usally the "art business", where they sell nonsense to some other parvenues who keep everything they cannot understand as "art" and buy it because they were told it's worth will grow strongly soon.

    bertram
    A la recherche du temps perdu: www. bersac.de

  6. #16
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    Take her into a Darkroom. Show her how an enlargement is made using dodging and burning techniques.


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  7. #17
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Photography is Art. One only has to study Clement Greenberg, the Ultimate Sensai of Art Critics, to reach that conclusion.

    I once had an interesting conversation about art with a particularly brittle gentle... - er, well ...
    He kept insisting that HE knew what was "Art" and what wasn't. Every well respected artist I could think of, in limited gallery schmoozing time, was excluded: "Not art!!!"

    That included: Renoir, Wyeth, Georgia O'Keeffe, Mary Cassat, Sargent, Rodin, Picasso ("Oh, no!! - nothing but a phony!) Alma-Tadema, Fragonard, Suerrat, Michelangelo, Anders Zorn, Rembrandt.... certainly NO photographers/ photographs! - many more... most of whom whose names I can't spell. All of their works were NOT art!

    In frustration, I finally asked him, "So what - whose work - DO you consider to be art?"

    After a fair amount of evasion, he came up with his pronouncement from his lofty mountain (or it must have seemed so, to him): Norman Rockwell!! He is an ARTIST! No one else - ever! Only Norman Rockwell!!"

    That deserved my well-used stock gallery answer - I won't translate it into its true meaning here; "What an interesting observation.", and moved on to the table holding the Gallery Wine / Battery Acid - "Vin Du Exide."

    I think Rockwell is a pretty good artist - brilliant Illustrator ... but "The Only one"???

    What a truly interesting observation.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  8. #18
    SuzanneR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,734
    Images
    139
    Just goes to show the state of art history and arts education in this country is pretty pathetic. Our schools just don't value the arts.

    I like Jorge's suggestion... make her define art.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Japan
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,957
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed Sukach
    I think Rockwell is a pretty good artist - brilliant Illustrator ... but "The Only one"???
    He's the only well-known shopping-mall artist in the eye of art historians. I mean, Rockwell's name always comes up as an icon of non-art because his illustrations/cartoons look somewhat cheesy for them.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Germany or Spain
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    159
    A pencil drawing can be a sophisticated piece of art, as well as a primitive sketch explaining your electrician where you want the sockets mounted.

    Same with photography. Art is not defined by the technical means, but by the person behind it and the intention of the work.

    Stupid example: Making P&S snapshots of our family under the christmas-tree this month most probably will not be art, because it was never intended to be art in the first place, it's purpose is to record a memory. However, if a photographer travels from country to country for ten years, making hundreds of pictures of families under their christmas-trees, then makes a selection of 50 photographs and mounts them on a 5 x 5 meter board and displays it in the pedestrian zone of a large city, you should consider that person an artist.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin