Quote Originally Posted by Mainecoonmaniac View Post
Now I have a questions for all those that responded to this post. Is art always supposed to be well technically executed and pretty? Or is art supposed to be challenging also?
I assume you mean challenging emotionally or philosophically. I think art can have a number of purposes. It doesn't need to be deep, but it can be and that can add. It can also be cheesy and distract from what would otherwise have been a nice photo. Does anybody know what Ansel Adam's purpose in his landscapes was? I imagine his art wasn't meant to be any more challenging than to show other people the world in a very technical fashion.

My question is what does the medium do to your message? A hyper-realist painter, a pro large format photographer, and a guy with an 8x10 polaroid (loaded with something more accurate than IP film) all make a picture of the same landscape. How does the medium change the message? What if it was a portrait?