Is video as important as still photography? Can a still photo

Tbh photography is inferior as an artistic medium to paint.

Photography is the lowest form of any art medium. It's too easy to be great at.

>>3090822
I know you're a samefag OP but this board is proof that photography is not easy at all.

you know what's easy?

researching the best gear for your budget.
getting a good deal on craigslist.
ordering expired fuji film off rakuten.
calling things 'snapshits' and 'uninteresting'.

you know what's hard?

taking a picture that is technically well-executed, interesting to look at, and meaningful on a deeper level.

plebs here will claim you can have a good picture with only 1 or 2 of those 3 criteria, but you can't.

>>3090888
Not the anon you're replying to, but it is unlikely that OP is samefagging because at the point of me typing this post there are 4 posters (I will be the 5th).

Photography, like all good hobbies, is easy to be good at, but impossible to be a master of. This is the same with singing, guitar, painting, and writing.

You also come off a bit autistic and self-righteous by insisting that you can't claim a photo is good without being all three of those criteria you listed. A photo doesn't need to be technically well-executed to be great.

>>3090470
video is more important than still photography
>>3090888
>technically well-executed, interesting to look at, and meaningful on a deeper level
the first two are very much arguable
I agree taking pictures that are meaningful is the most important thing, I'd argue it's pretty much the only important thing if you want to make artistic photos
if you don't care about that then anything goes really

>>3090902
>I agree taking pictures that are meaningful is the most important thing
Meaning varies from one viewer to the next. What is meaningful to you might be trivial shit to someone else

>>3090470
Imo, video is better since you can extract still photographs from it. It's like video as the whole, stills as the bits. I tend to screenshot movies with noteworthy cinematography as reference and inspiration for taking photos.

Though I also admire what candid stills photography offers where someone captures that split second moment flawlessly in street photography without intervention. It's either the one who took it was a lucky bastard, has developed the necessary visual awareness for consistency or both.

You guys are legitimately comparing apples and oranges. You can apply similar principles to both, but the workflow and thought process behind creating good work in either medium is unique enough to say there isn't seamless crossover between the two arts.

There's so much more to the argument than arbitrarily saying one is better than the other.

>>3091040
if there was a way to rate comments on /p/ (i know it sounds very much like an overused layout and i should probably go another website for that but...) i would give you the up-ding *gay*

>>3090817
>>3090822
You guys realize photography isn't art, right? It is a technology. It arguably becomes art once you experiment and alter the way the light flows into the camera, but photography in its basic form is simply a technology used for documentation and other various things, not art.
>photography is inferior as an artistic medium to paint
Photography and drawing/painting are the same medium, which is creating images from one perspective. They're the same thing except with one the image is recorded by light transferring directly, and the other with light going into your eyes and manually rendering the image by hand. onto Drawing/painting is manual photography, and because of this it allows more room for creativity as you can capture things stylistically and also capture and create things that don't actually exist. But, the same principle that applies to photography applies to drawing/painting too, that is if you are drawing what is in front of you without adding any sort of variant then you are simply documenting what already exist, and not creating, therefore it is not art.

>>3091040
>You guys are legitimately comparing apples and oranges.
Not really. Video IS a form of photography. It's simply taking many photos at once in order to capture motion.

With this thread, I was trying to ask the question: is motion important? Or is it redundant as a single photo can capture an event just as well?

>>3091120
>You guys realize photography isn't art, right? It is a technology.
The camera is the technology, and in this context, we are discussing photography as an artform. This has nothing to do with the way the light flows into the camera. It's an art because the artefact (the photograph) created is made through artistic deliberation.
>Photography and drawing/painting are the same medium
I don't agree with this at all, but I can see why you would say this. You do realise that photography, drawing and painting utilise different media, right? Even on the realism continuum, photography starts on the opposite end of the spectrum compared to drawing and painting. They are not in any way the same medium.
>Video IS a form of photography. It's simply taking many photos at once in order to capture motion
Once again, your definitions are too literal and you're overlooking the thought process that leads to the result. You're comparing video and photo purely as media formats. If video was the paragraph, photography would be the sentence.