Why is photography the lowest form of art?

File: art-students.jpg (30KB, 264x330px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 264x330px

>>3056443

>>3056443
Still more dignified than smearing colored grease on a stretched cloth.

>>3056443
says who?

>>3056448
>2010 meme

File: qualityart.jpg.jpg.jpg (39KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 900x900px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uu6__4WO88o

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Color Space Information	sRGB

It's just so easy to be pretty good at, and there has been a depreciation of appreciation of photography in the last decade. Simply put - it's easy to be good at, and phone cameras have democratised photography to a whole new level.

>>3056815
aye, the old ones are the best

File: pollock.jpg (591KB, 1200x782px) Image search: [Google]

591KB, 1200x782px

>>3056820
>Simply put - it's easy to be good at
yes, it is isn't it

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Picasa
Photographer	Picasa
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72
Vertical Resolution	72
Image Created	2012:04:07 12:25:44
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1200
Image Height	782
Unique Image ID	9e23c8ce31b61e612b28a6bf0e928bcb

How can photography be the lowest form of art, when it is not even art?

>>3056443
The only people who say that are low life scum that couldn't take a decent picture if their life depended on it.

Very funny, OP. Everyone knows performance art is worst art.

>>3056897
>proves his point

>>3056897
>What is a memetographer

>>3057239
Yes, but who's point

>>3056820
I would agree that technology has advanced to the point where good photography equipment is more affordable to the hobbyist. And everyone has decent enough camera's in their phones.

But the of rules of composition light, tone and colour, message, cultural relevance, etc, still apply to those trying to create an artistic photograph.

If anything the availability of cameras to millions and the platforms that they can be displayed on show us just how mediocre most people are at photography. Hell even a large minority Pro photographers fucking suck nuts, use boring lighting, unimaginative composition and rely solely on the attractiveness of their models. But people eat that shit right up. Because (of course) what the the general population class as 'good' is wildly different to that of the enthusiast.

Phone cameras, cheap DSLR's, fucking around with the sliders and adding an instagram filters make it easy to create photos that look 'good' in only the most gimmicky of ways.

But the best photos still stand out to the people who know.

>>3056443
It's just the easiest to start off in, so 95% of it is garbage...but I wouldn't count that garbage as art.

Also
>Creating a hierarchy for art
>Having a vague concept of what art it

Pick one

File: artist-s-shit-1961.jpg (91KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 600x600px

>>3056443
It's not.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: storyteller.jpg (124KB, 430x480px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 430x480px

>Why is photography the lowest form of art?

• Because it removes the artist from 90% of the artistic process.
• The content pre exists - the photographer merely records it.
• So often no impression of the photographer left in his work at all. His work is a mere observation with no embellishment to excite a new significance in the content.

The advent of photography also began the collapse of traditional painting and sculpture as ways of representing the past. They were simply no longer needed to record what had happened previously. It independently murdered romanticism and spurred the modern art movement between 1885 and 1980. Artists were suddenly without their key subject matter - the past, so they decided to experiment with light, colour and form as ways of communicating ideas with less craftsmanship required.

Fortunately we then slid into postmodernity where experimentation AND representation have started to become popular again.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:15 15:06:56
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	430
Image Height	480

>>3057314
http://jezebel.com/heres-a-woman-plopping-paint-eggs-out-of-her-vagina-1566693939

Manzoni was saying "people will even buy my canned shit because its a physical memento of my legacy."

He was right.

She was saying "Look, you people will be fascinated by the spectacle of me dropping eggs out of my hairy duffle bag."

She was wrong.

>>3056448

fpbp

>>3056448

I once worked with a student from China... asked her what she was taking here in Canada. She said "photography" and I laughed. Then I realized she was serious.

She's back in China now, selling produce.

>>3057376
Trolling is not a art.

>>3057501
Performance art and trolling are the exact same thing.

>>3057354
>The photographer merely records it.
Yeah sure and composition does not exist. /p/ never ceases to amazd

>>3058601
To amaze me*

>>3056443
So many people are doing it.

Just like every creative field, there is a big difference between a photographer making an extensive project and some landscape photographer uploading snapshits to Instagram.

I like those photographers who spend some time photographing a specific region and compile it into something cool, like Alec Soth.

>>3057354
I would say the purpose of photography is to visually document something, but to also make the viewer feel a certain emotion about the photo.

If a photographer can make the viewer feel a certain emotion about the photo, then that is something special.

File: Screenshot_20170417-180045.png (2MB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x2560px

Literal finger paintings.
Sells them for hundreds of pounds.
But she's a "real artist" because she doesn't do photography.

>>3056443
Why are you the lowest form of swap scum?

>>3057354
Give the same subject to 10 différent photograph and you will have 10 different pictures. And you said it remove the artist from the artistic project and left no impression of the photographer? N00b

>>3056443

Because anyone can point a camera at something.

And with 20 fps, one or two shots are bound to be good.

>>3056443
Show me your photos.

>>3056820
People say this all the time and I think we as people just lower the bar when it comes to photos.

If most of what people took pictures of were painted or drawn with identical composition and lighting I don't think anyone would give a shit about the pictures. But photography, despite being visual, is not always seen as visual art, it's just a means to convey information. So a "great photo" is often just a photo of a subject the particular viewer finds interesting, even there was no skill or careful thought applied when taking it. I don't think phones have anything to do with it either, it's always been this way.

It's funny though because this argument of "photo is easy/everyone has a camera" is usually a statement uttered by other photographers, not normal non-photography people. Plenty of normal people I know are self-aware enough to view photography as something fairly special that requires some dedication and practice to get good at. So it makes me think fellow photographers just take it for granted, not just because so many others do it, but because they've done it for so long that they are always exposed to it and always thinking about it. Really think about it, IS everyone in the world a photographer or trying to be one? Nope, but if it's your life, it sure as shit can seem that way.

>>3061646
Shut up Bort

>>3061647
not even one of mine.

>>3061652
K