by Richard Ellis

Created on: May 26, 2009   Last Updated: June 06, 2009

Photography as Art
Can a mechanical/chemical process such as photography be considered art? I think so, but like all art it depends mostly on the skill and talent of the artist and somewhat on the eye of the viewer. The mechanical and chemical factors are really only minor contributors to the end result; much as paint and canvas are to a fine painting. Paint, brush, and canvas do not of themselves make a great work of art; neither do film, paper and camera.

The artist (photographer) must have the skills and talent necessary in order to produce any great work of art. Something that anyone would be proud to hang on their wall. He must see in that special way that all fine artists see. He must discern the best composition, the best use of light and shadow, and know intuitively when to snap the shutter. Let me illustrate:

I once read of a very famous photographer who was commissioned to produce a photo spread for a magazine layout. The client was paying a lot of money for this model "shoot" and wanted to be there when it took place. The day of the shoot arrived. So did the client and was taken to the studio where the assistants were setting up the camera, lighting, and props, and placing the model. The famous photographer was no where in sight. The client waited, not so patiently, until all was ready for the big moment. Finally one of the assistants, who was in charge of the camera, called the photographer on the intercom. "Everything is ready, boss". Presently, the famous photographer came into the studio, gave a few instructions about minor lighting adjustments and a suggestion or two to the model and then stood behind the assistant who was apparently going to take the pictures.

The client was furious! He railed at the photographer; I'm paying a small fortune to have YOU to take this picture and your flunkies are doing all of the work. What am I paying you for?"

The photographer ignored the client and lined himself up behind the camera man. He watched carefully as the model went through the requested motions; The famous photographer said: "wait...wait...NOW!" The camera man snapped the shutter. The photographer turned to the client and said: "THAT is what you are paying me for.

The photographs resulting from that session were said to be of "wall art" quality; veritable works of art. Needless to say the client was very pleased.

Anyone can snap a shutter, but it takes an artist to know when!

There have been many well known photographers who's photography is considered fine works of art. I will name a few here.

Ansel Adams was arguably the greatest of all landscape photographers.

Richard Avedon specialized in portraiture with minimal props.

Margaret Bourke-White was a famous photojournalist who's landscape and portrait work could compete in any gallery.

Henri-Cartier Bresson recorded life as it happened.

Joe Rosenthal composed and photographed the famous raising of the U.S. flag at Iwo Jima.

All of these people and many others from the past and working today are "artists" with the camera. Some strive to make their living doing mostly commercial or commissioned work, but each one is capable of producing fine works of art, because they are all fine artists in their own right.

By the way, the difference between an expert and an artist is: the expert knows all there is to know about a subject and uses his knowledge to take the subject to its limits; the artist knows all there is to know about a subject and uses his knowledge to take the subject beyond its limits.

Learn more about this author, Richard Ellis.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.