I was talking to a friend of mine who sells cameras at a local camera store (yes, they still exist!). He was commenting on how film was making a comeback and they had been selling quite a few film cameras of late. I'm not sure why, but if true, it's nice to think a new generation of film and chemistry photographers is finding the joys of film, even if I have taken the digital road.
I began thinking about articles and posts I've been reading describing a new interest in old processes. Although they love film for many reasons, many also feel this type of photography is somehow more important than digital photography. They praise the traditional because it is "art", somehow more significant than anything digital could possibly create. For many years, I shot film and printed black & white in a darkroom - and I loved it. It was satisfying and it was an important way to communicate how I saw the world. But for many, photography was not art. It was either too 'technical' or too easily 'reproduced', which made it anything but art. Now of course, digital has become king of the photography world, while film and chemistry have taken a back seat... except for one place. The art world has elevated traditional photography to the high arts. It is argued that digital photography can't be art as it is too 'technical' and too easily 'reproduced'... wait... What? This attitude has been around for as long as I can remember, and doesn't limit itself to photography. Metalwork, sculpture and fiber arts have all been questioned as to their validity as art. The arguments were always the same and had no more validity then as those same arguments do now. All art has some kind of technical expertise needed. For instance, painters need to understand the mixing of colors and determine what brush to use for a specific effect while working in clay, stone or wood will change the look and texture of a sculpture. Choosing the materials one uses, using a style to evoke a specific emotion, and understanding the medium one works in are all important steps in communication through art. But these steps are not the art itself. Art has nothing to do with the medium you choose. Photography is no different as a medium. Using film and chemicals instead of sensors and software does not make you an artist. These choices are not what makes art. Art has to do with your vision, not your equipment. We, as photographers, have to look at light, interpret what we see, and then make decisions, either with chemistry or with computers, so we will go beyond just recording what we looked at. We must create something that evokes emotion, something that makes a viewer pause and think, that captures a moment in time that will never be quite the same again. If I can press a button and make the same print again and again, how is this different from the mass production of any image? The art is in the capture of light, the choices one makes in the creation of the image and in the emotional impact our work instills in the viewer. So let's stop mistaking the medium with the art and start talking about expression, about emotion, about experiences. That is art.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
fotostufphotographic illuminations Archives
December 2018
Categories
All
|