I have zero understanding of what is going on in this thread, it's borderline 4chan material.
carry on
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
It's all about art vs decor via recent instant editing/enhancement filter/plug in programs...
It's about why we never see tutorials about increasing imagination and creativity when it comes to subject matters.
And it hints at the potential for political deception being made easier through such manipulation of imagery.
And it stirs up some common gut reactions in defense of what is a sensitive and personal joy, apparently being criticized...
"Photography" is undergoing some radical, elemental shifts which will eliminate our ability to trust pictures at all. It used to be extremely hard to fake a photo well enough to fool even those who were suspicious of it. It is getting much easier and more popular...and few seem to notice and see any reason to care very much. - It's an unpopular topic that isn't easy to approach...
Awediot wrote: It's about why we never see tutorials about increasing imagination and creativity when it comes to subject matters.
All hilarity of the thread aside, I need to comment on this notion. To imply that there is some formulaic solution to a lack of creativity is a bit of a paradox.
Google search "creativity" and it is defined as: "the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations, etc.; originality, progressiveness, or imagination"
Tutorials are based on what people have dubbed universally accepted "rules" or "steps for success" based on a common concept.
There are no tutorials for how to master creativity because creativity is defined as using existing ideas to form one's own entirely new concept.
Technicalities can be taught. Creativity cannot.
If you're upset that you aren't feeling creative enough (and every artist in the world, be they a photographer, writer, musical composer, painter, sculptor, whatever goes through creative block at some point), just practice the traditional stuff until you find some inspiration outside of the norm.
Also, implying that photos that aren't entirely genuine "realistically" (like, composite photography for example) isn't "art" is like saying most paintings aren't real art. Creativity is creativity. Just because people don't always make masterpieces out of snapshots doesn't mean they're not true artists.
No, it's not an unpopular topic. We get lots of purists here who try to shame people who edit their photos, but we've discussed many times that that type of shaming is pointless because no digital photography is truly "natural".
When someone is utterly talentless, it goes either way. Some people know light and angles enough to get an outstanding unedited photo, but that takes incredible talent. On the other side of the spectrum, there are some people who, no matter how much time they spend editing, can't produce a good photo to save their lives.
In ART, there is no "right" or "wrong" way to do anything. There is only an outcome, presented to whatever audience, which depends on their perception, and can generally be taken as "good" or "bad".
Awediot wrote: It's about why we never see tutorials about increasing imagination and creativity when it comes to subject matters.
All hilarity of the thread aside, I need to comment on this notion. To imply that there is some formulaic solution to a lack of creativity is a bit of a paradox.
Indeed... One of the coolest ones.
Google search "creativity" and it is defined as: "the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations, etc.; originality, progressiveness, or imagination"
Technicalities can be taught. Creativity cannot.
Agree with the first part...
If you're upset that you aren't feeling creative enough
Also, implying that photos that aren't entirely genuine "realistically" (like, composite photography for example) isn't "art" is like saying most paintings aren't real art. Creativity is creativity. Just because people don't always make masterpieces out of snapshots doesn't mean they're not true artists.
You've misunderstood me... I'm thinking more about the bigger difference between "art" and "decoration", and how the distinction is blurring...not in small part thanks to editing... A better execution doesn't make a cliched subject matter art, nor does a lousy one diminish the creativity of a piece.
No, it's not an unpopular topic. We get lots of purists here who try to shame people who edit their photos, but we've discussed many times that
that type of shaming is pointless because no digital photography is
truly "natural".
With war and the neglect of the homeless, elderly, mentally ill, kids, women, gays...shaming people about the photo filters they use isn't high on my priority list... The promotion of pretty cliches as art is just a pet peeve...and no, that doesn't get discussed very much.
So we're left with the question "can creativity/imagination be taught?" Sounds like a good topic for a new thread...(look for it)
[My foray into photo contest sites over the past few years has made this topic pointed... Say the theme of a contest is "Summer"... Now, imagine what the top five winners will probably look like, (we'll all picture pretty much the same thing, then don't do any of them... That WILL make you more creative... It is in part an 'un-learning' process']
*(CRAP... Sorry about the lousy formatting with th equote box...out of practice and patience with it for the moment. Hopefully the readers can figure it out...
Awediot wrote: It's about why we never see tutorials about increasing imagination and creativity when it comes to subject matters.
All hilarity of the thread aside, I need to comment on this notion. To imply that there is some formulaic solution to a lack of creativity is a bit of a paradox.
Indeed... One of the coolest ones.
Google search "creativity" and it is defined as: "the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations, etc.; originality, progressiveness, or imagination"
Technicalities can be taught. Creativity cannot.
Agree with the first part...
If you're upset that you aren't feeling creative enough
Also, implying that photos that aren't entirely genuine "realistically" (like, composite photography for example) isn't "art" is like saying most paintings aren't real art. Creativity is creativity. Just because people don't always make masterpieces out of snapshots doesn't mean they're not true artists.
You've misunderstood me... I'm thinking more about the bigger difference between "art" and "decoration", and how the distinction is blurring...not in small part thanks to editing... A better execution doesn't make a cliched subject matter art, nor does a lousy one diminish the creativity of a piece.
No, it's not an unpopular topic. We get lots of purists here who try to shame people who edit their photos, but we've discussed many times that
that type of shaming is pointless because no digital photography is
truly "natural".
With war and the neglect of the homeless, elderly, mentally ill, kids, women, gays...shaming people about the photo filters they use isn't high on my priority list... The promotion of pretty cliches as art is just a pet peeve...and no, that doesn't get discussed very much.
So we're left with the question "can creativity/imagination be taught?" Sounds like a good topic for a new thread...(look for it)
[My foray into photo contest sites over the past few years has made this topic pointed... Say the theme of a contest is "Summer"... Now, imagine what the top five winners will probably look like, (we'll all picture pretty much the same thing, then don't do any of them... That WILL make you more creative... It is in part an 'un-learning' process']
*(CRAP... Sorry about the lousy formatting with th equote box...out of practice and patience with it for the moment. Hopefully the readers can figure it out...
The problem with this whole debate is you're trying to dictate what art is, and there is no universal standard. There is no difference between decoration and art, it's all in the eye of the beholder. The rest is just filler, fluff and rambling.
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
Scotty wrote: The problem with this whole debate is you're trying to dictate what art is, and there is no universal standard. There is no difference between decoration and art, it's all in the eye of the beholder. The rest is just filler, fluff and rambling.
Although commercial art is made purely as a money grab, it's still art. There's a reason it's appealing to the masses. They utilize the same methods that a fine artist uses, and both are artists in the same sense: They are both still appealing to an audience. They even have the same motives (money), although the fine artist is more interested in using their own innovations to grasp the attention of their audience (the best fine art is appealing because it is unusual), and the commercial artist utilizes what they know the audience will appreciate to help a corporation sell a product.
I follow a commercial photographer on facebook who is an INCREDIBLE artist. He's creative, he's innovative, and he does commercial photography. Take a look at his stuff:
www.timtadder.com/
If you don't like his work, that's your deal. If you claim it not to be art then you clearly don't understand the concept of art.
Leilanee wrote: They even have the same motives (money), although the fine artist is more interested in using their own innovations to grasp the attention of their audience
Seriously untrue... Born artists are driven to spin the world around them into different shapes and colors and sounds and meanings, be they useful, beautiful, MARKETABLE, wanted...noticed or not. There is no other motives except to make that thing a little more like it is in their head...and maybe show it off...and MAYBE try to make a little living off of it. But they'd do it regardless.
If you don't like his work, that's your deal. If you claim it not to be art then you clearly don't understand the concept of art.
I like his work... Some I'd consider more artistic than others because they seem to be about something other than making a product or celeb look good enough to give my credit card over for... But even commercial art can be beyond creative. It's need to appeal to the masses however tends to frown on that...
BTW...If you agree with Scotty's assessment that art is "all in the eye of the beholder", then you've no way to claim that anyone doesn't understand the concept of art just because they may not have the same taste you do.
The Canon EOS R100 is an entry-level mirrorless camera introduced in 2023. But just because it’s an entry-level camera doesn’t mean it’s a bare-bones camera. Find out why in this review!
Nikon’s retro-looking Nikon Zfc is anything but retro. Under its classic body is a host of features and amenities that make it a worthwhile compact mirrorless camera for 2024.
The Canon EOS R50 is one of the newest R-system cameras from Canon. Is it worth your money? Find out all the details you need to know in this comprehensive review.
The Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II is Sony’s flagship mirrorless zoom lens. As such, it’s loaded with features and has a top-shelf build quality that makes it a top pick!
Creating impactful photos of landscapes depends on many factors, not the least of which is your talent behind the lens. This guide explores other elements required for the best product.
The Canon EOS R100 is an entry-level mirrorless camera introduced in 2023. But just because it’s an entry-level camera doesn’t mean it’s a bare-bones camera. Find out why in this review!
The Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV is a micro four thirds camera released in 2020. It’s an entry-level system along with the OM-D E-M5 Mark III. Use this guide to determine which one is best for you!
Blue hour photography might not be as well known as golden hour photography, but it is every bit as good a time to create epic images of landscapes. Learn how in this quick tutorial!
Nikon’s retro-looking Nikon Zfc is anything but retro. Under its classic body is a host of features and amenities that make it a worthwhile compact mirrorless camera for 2024.
Moving from taking snapshots of your dog to creating beautiful images doesn’t have to be that difficult! Use the tips outlined in this dog photography guide, and you’ll get better results in no time.
Acrylic print photos are a beautiful way to display your favorite images. But they don’t come without some questions. Get all the answers you need about this medium in this guide!
