If you’re a reader of this blog , then you already know that photography is accomplished with a device (a camera), with an opening (a lens), through which light passes, and is recorded, along with it’s respective shadows and colors, on a medium (film or a sensor), in order to create an image.
And if you know anything about art, then you know that that also involves capturing an image, composed of materials that represent light and shadows and colors, on a medium (canvas, paper, sidewalk), with a device (brush, pen, chalk).
Similarities abound, but photographs and art typically are the result of different processes and exist in different orbits around those with creative spirits.
But as digital photography advances, and technology, both in-camera and in software becomes ever more powerful, that line between art and photography begins to blur.
Case in point, the above photo, I mean artwork, umm, well, what I mean to say is that that image started as a photo I made last week on Cape Cod, with my digital camera, imported into my iPad and edited in iPhoto. iPhoto can handle all of the basic editing functions of sharpening and cropping, lightening and saturating. But like so many photo editing programs today, it also comes with some creative, artistic features, one of which yielded the photo/artwork you see above; (best viewed large).
Is this art? Under any circumstances, that’s a subjective question. Does it’s color and light evoke any feelings, any emotion, some memories perhaps? I believe with technology blurring the distinction between art and photography, it’s hard to say, and it’s definitely a personal choice.
For me, this is art. I feel it’s energy, and I recognize both it’s resemblance to reality, and it’s similarity to watercolors. How it came into existence becomes irrelevant. I just like it.
But that’s just me. I welcome your thoughts on the subject. And thanks for visiting 2GP.