More than a few photographers, myself included, periodically experience a mild case of angst attempting to answer the question: Am I an artist or a craftsman?The short answer is both.
At times, I honestly consider myself an artist. That's because, in my opinion, the images I capture and process constitute an art form. Since I'm doing the capturing and processing, that makes me an artist. (Leastwise, I'm occasionally able to convince myself that's what I am and/or what I'm doing.)
But most of the time, I'm a craftsman. Why? Because most of what I shoot I'm shooting for someone else, i.e., a client or a customer, who is paying me to photographically capture images, per their instructions or direction, in a way that demonstrates a certain level of photographic craft-competency.
I realize that, throughout history, artists have been commissioned to produce art. But my clients and customers generally don't qualify as patrons-of-the-arts or artist's benefactors. They don't commission me to shoot pretty girl pics. They're simply people who want me to take some pictures of whatever it is they want me taking pictures of and they want me to do so with a craftsman's skill. And for doing that they pay me. They don't pay me for my artistic visions, they pay me for my skill and experience. In other words, they hire me because they consider me a photographic craftsman or, in simpler terms, a fairly decent shooter.
Whether you pursue photography as an art or a craft doesn't really matter. Hey! Whatever turns you on, right? But remember this: Throughout history, many great artists have died in poverty with few people recognizing their artistic greatness. Many, many craftsman, on the other hand, earned good incomes and went to their graves with full stomachs and in a warm and comfy bed. (A big nod to Cobalt, a Glamour1 forum member, for his reminder concerning this, provided in a forum thread started by another G1 member, zoot_zeussir.)
The pretty girl at the top is Kirsten. One of my clients, Wicked Pictures, recently hired me to shoot some on-the-set pics of Kirsten (and some other beautiful babes) at a location house during the production of one of their flicks.
2 comments:
The distinction between art and craft is a false one, imposed around the turn of the twentieth century by art dealers who realized that while it takes a Godward months or years to produce a painting, an Impressionist can slap one out in days or weeks, and if they could just convince patrons of the arts that Impressionism, etc, was Real Art and worth just as much as art that is actually hard to do, they could increase sales by orders of magnitude.
Any achievement of a human being with esthetic value, created with enhancing that esthetic value, is art. I am not denigrating Impressionists, although it may sound that way. It's just that the idea that craft is lesser than, if not actively opposed to, Art, is nonsensical and I always meet it not with debate, of which it is not worthy, but with honest derision.
M
Well, thanks for straightening that one out, M.
Post a Comment