Is Photography Dead?

Posted By: theCameraClicks @ 12/18/2007 11:30:24 PM

Comment: Photography as an art form is most certainly NOT dead. I attended this year's Art Basel Miami as a member of the press, and the ratio of photography to more traditional art forms has increased. There was a very strong presence of photography in not only Art Basel, but in the numerous photo-only expos (ie: Miami Art Photo Expo, Photo Miami, AIPAD, etc). I was attended these event to photograph and document the presence of photography as an art form. Photography is finally being accepted as fine art. Most of the photography being shown in the fine art world, is being shot with film and not with digital capture. thousands.

Posted By: theCameraClicks @ 12/18/2007 11:28:44 PM

Comment: Photography as an art form is most certainly NOT dead. I attended this year's Art Basel Miami as a member of the press, and the ratio of photography to more traditional art forms has increased. There was a very strong presence of photography in not only Art Basel, but in the numerous photo-only expos (ie: Miami Art Photo Expo, Photo Miami, AIPAD, etc). I was attended these event to photograph and document the presence of photography as an art form. Photography is finally being accepted as fine art. Most of the photography being shown in the fine art world, is being shot with film and not with digital capture.

Posted By: SOULEYES @ 12/16/2007 12:03:20 PM

Comment: I have been a dedicated Photographer Artist for over 42 years. I have been widely published, I have taught at two important schools here in NYC. I have some work in the MOMA Collection. But for anyone's interest, when I achieved this 'honor' of having my work accepted to the most important Collection of Photographic ART in the world, it turned out to be the END of my career, that is how Commercial the Photo Galleries have become and here in NYC no less that used to be the International Capital of Art.

I can explain the above by citing the fact that the Galleries and in this city especially, are hard pressed by Astronomical Costs that have required the Dealers to take a far more conservative course, they deal exclusively in established icons or Commodities and have NO interest in that most exciting produce that is the work of Unknowns.

For these reasons and because we now have ALL the Visual Entertainment we could ever wish available to us in our own homes at the Click of a Zapper, Photography has come to seem to be a very EMPTY and even Lackluster medium. We are NOT very impressed with it anymore despite the excellence that some Artists continue to bring to it. WHO needs PRINT Mediums period anymore is the Question and this again having to do with the fact that we now have so much TV with FILM and VIDEO.

But there are other reasons. Photography had as its MOST PROFOUND virtue and 'competitive' point, that it represented the ART of the REAL. Now we have seen FOOLS take the medium over to DIMINISH it to 'Just Another' Visual Art to be used to create visions of Fantasy. Is this really supposed to compete with Painting? It does NOT suffice it to say...

A once profound medium that DOCUMENTED our LIVES has been reduced to being just another 'Strumpet' of the Art Scene. ARTIFICE now replaces REALITY...

And NOW as the ultimate BANKRUPTING of Photography's values, it's a callow Contest as to WHO makes the BIGGEST PRINTS!.

I'm a Life Long Photographer Artist of stature who LOVED this medium and even I no longer care to see it anymore at the Galleries and Museums for all the reasons given...

And this being so, WHY should anyone else be interested??? The medium can not continue a real viability simply on the interest of a FEW...

When REALITY comes back in STYLE, Photography may come back with it...

But a Medium that is the MOST FAITHFUL MEANS we have of Documenting REALITY can NOT be expected to count for much in an era of the DENIAL of same...

Which is the DEFINING quality of the Era we are Living (Surviving) in Today and in America especially....

Mr. Shelly Rusten NYC

Posted By: David James @ 12/12/2007 4:58:47 PM

Comment: I have been a photographer for, well, a long time. The word PHOTOGRAPHY is from Latin, 'Photo' is light and 'Graph' is Drawing.
Digital is the most exciting advance in our profession for many years, we have complete control over our work. Gone are the times I have had labs use 'old' developer , scratch, boil (yes boil film in the wash), or simply lose it in the bottom of the tank.
Let's face it, pictures have been manipulated since photography came into being, now it's simply easier and more creative.
As for truth in Art, do Piccasso's women really look like that?

Posted By: kohlerimaging @ 12/06/2007 8:43:49 AM

Comment: I have been a professional photographer for4 years, and I have been shooting for over 9. I travel back and forth between both the traditional methods, and with digital. As a working professional, it would be nearly impossible to operate as I do without digital technology, due to the growing scarcity of quality color labs. However, this is not something I would change. There are good things about both of them. I find it appalling that you would look down on a digital image simply because it might not be "real", and thus not "true". Is a peak inside my mind not truth? Isn't that what ALL artists strive to achieve? If I wanted you to see exactly what was there, I would not put up a picture, but directions to the location, instead. Before you look down on what isn't real, and on what some would say is "easy"...let me just say...I can creat images of scenes that don't exist, and can't exist. Can you?

Posted By: kohlerimaging @ 12/06/2007 8:38:35 AM

Comment: I have been a photographer for 9 years, and an actual professional at it for 4. I have learned both sides of the coin, and move freely through them both. Traditional photography has it's appeal, but so does digital. I find it appalling that you would look down on the things that I can create, simply because it is done on a computer, and since it's not "real", then it must not be "truth". Why is it OK for other mediums, but not photography? Is not giving you a peak inside my mind truth enough? If I wanted you to see the scene, exactly as it exists, I would not put pictures on the wall, I would put up directions to locations. We look at art to show us truth, yes. But it's a deception. It always has been. Ceci n'est pas une pipe.
I can create images of scenes that don't exist, can't exist, anywhere. Can you?

Posted By: Designergurl333 @ 12/05/2007 1:50:00 PM

Comment: I have been a photographer for over 12 years, and I just started learning to use a digital camera in 2005. I truely love photography, it is my life, and I could not ever imagin a life with out it. I have a box of photo's from my family dated back to 1912, and it is just amazing what they could do with a simple tiny box for a camera. I hope we don't lose the art of photo's.