Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,565   Posts: 1,545,331   Online: 915
      
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 51 to 55 of 55
  1. #51
    Bromo33333's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    669
    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel_OB View Post
    "In short - are prints the art work? or is it plausible to say - the IMAGE is the work of art, the print is A rendition."

    A photograph is a print, material think that has its material properties. Platinum print looks differently that silver gel. a print of the same image...
    A photograph is not work of art, it might be is. One of the best print ever made at the time when it is shut (around 1920) was consider just anything but not work of art. Beauty does not lie in its subject but in the WORK. Remeber Durrer's mother drawing, time worn woman.

    A print can be work of art, an image is nothing, if we consider that an image is a subject a photograph represnts.
    In painting it was not unsusal for someone to use a camera lucida (or is is obscura?) - well a pinhole thingie to help frame the painting - and not much hand ringing is done about if the painting is the work or the image. So I think you are right - it is the end work that is the art - not that it matters a ton...
    B & D
    Rochester, NY
    ========================
    Quiquid Latine dictum sit altum viditur

  2. #52
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel_OB View Post
    "A photograph is a print, material think that has its material properties. Platinum print looks differently that silver gel. a print of the same image...
    A photograph is not work of art, it might be is. One of the best print ever made at the time when it is shut (around 1920) was consider just anything but not work of art. Beauty does not lie in its subject but in the WORK. Remeber Durrer's mother drawing, time worn woman.
    A print can be work of art, an image is nothing, if we consider that an image is a subject a photograph represnts.
    I don't mean to be offensive ... but I'm having real trouble understanding this...

    WHAT "One of the best print ever made at the time it is shut was (around 1920) was consider(ed?) just anything but not a work of art".

    At the time WHAT is (was?) shut? Who did the "considering"?

    ??? "is not a work of art, it might be is." ????
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  3. #53
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I've been everywhere ooooohhh yeaahhhh still I'm standing tall.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,653
    Chaucun a son gout.....
    "He took to writing poetry and visiting the elves: and though many shook their heads and touched their foreheads and said 'Poor old Baggins!' and though few believed any of his tales, he remained very happy till the end of his days, and those were extraordinarily long "- JRR Tolkien, ' The Hobbit '.

  4. #54
    Daniel_OB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Mississauga, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    420
    Ed
    Looking at photography as form of art, as initially the only purpose of photography was, shut made by (name of photog is something like Rise or similar), of bandits in NYC (New York City). It is documentary photograph and at the time it is made was considered as nothing more than a snapshot. Later on the same photograph draw more and more attention. Today, (after photog passed away) the same photograph is considered among the "best" photograph ever made. I think that now many knows what photograph I talk about. It is way in art ALWAYS. One of the rare law in art. One is artist long after the guy is in heaven. It just cannot be different way (in our time, around year 2000). Hope it is clear.

    "is not a work of art, it might be is."
    If photyography is art than every photograph is work of art. This is not true. A photograph once made might be is work of art might be not. A long time after it is made can be judged (there are and rare exceptions like in just anything). Whistler's mother (painting) long time resident in history of art is just (I think for the wrong reason) droped out from to be representative painting of the artist.... So there is no -for sure- art it is always -might be-. How thinks are going today even and Michaelangelo is no more -for sure-.

    www.Leica-R.com
    Last edited by Daniel_OB; 10-31-2006 at 03:58 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #55
    Daniel_OB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Mississauga, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    420
    Ed
    I think you have one quest. more
    At the time WHAT is (was?) shut? Who did the "considering"?

    Do you mean who are the people that say "this is art" or "this is not art". Is that the question?

    www.Leica-R.com

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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