Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post
I'm not sure how much this post was tongue-in-cheek, but to the extent that it's serious, I think you're conflating technique (which of course is often highly specific to materials and workflow) with artistic concerns (which mostly aren't). The OP and most of this thread were, I think, talking mainly about the latter.
Only just a tiny bit tongue in the cheek.
I know there is a difference between technique and artistic content but as I see it the ones starting up in photography are also artistic inspired by the ones teaching the techniques so I think the one follows the other so to say

Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post
That said, I think if I were going to send an aspiring photographer forth to learn about the artistic uses of lighting, the first name I pulled out wouldn't be a photographer, it'd be Goya. Apart from techniques, I'm not sure there's any special reason why photographers should be privileged over painters in the *artistic* education of an aspiring photographer; composition is composition whether it's rendered in silver or oil or pixels, right? But you never hear photographic educators complaining that their students have never seen a Renoir.

Yeps art before photography

Best regards