all three are wonderful photographers; i don't really understand the divide; ie; 'painter' - 'photographer' - suppose that is fundamental;artists utilise many different tools and methods to create.I have become more interested in photography of recent (thanks to you) and found that you can bounce between both; hitting and sparking the other.Many (and I do include myself) get stuck for long periods of time and venturing into 'unknown' territory can be very liberating.This doesn't really discuss the photographers work; but more the importance I have found in travelling further than ones own 'pre-defined' limitations.Thanks for the inspiration.
Thanks for your comment Mr. Supervisor!Been a while since you have graced these pages.Well, I guess there isn't really a divide if you call yourself an artist, then you can make any sort of art, and use all sorts of tools to create your art and express yourself. I have always identified myself as a painter (at least since school, where that became my focus). Which makes me wonder why it became my focus...Anyway that is another blog post I imagine. It is very common for artists to explore many mediums together or apart in their work. I sometimes get caught in some sort of rigid ideas about what I can or can not do, or what is expected of me, or what I should do. But, as you know (and other blog readers can surely tell) my own interest in photography has increased since joining blip foto (thanks to you). And now my desire to express things through photography is getting stronger and stronger, as my painting (I feel) can only go so far. I will always probably consider myself a painter but photography is certainly gaining on me. I am excited about exploring photography in my new project, which I haven't really revealed yet on my blog.Like you say "unknown territory can be very liberating" and I am all for that and for "bouncing between both."Thanks for your thoughtful comment.
Photography is an art.
Art is Art. I love the way you and FS have the desire to express through photography. I am jealous of that because I feel limited with photography myself, and just burn with desire to paint and manipulate multi media. I really appreciate photography and I find it jaw-dropping and inspirational.Keep up the wonderful work :))
very powerful accounts in the videos by the way...
i saw the cindy sherman retrospective in new york at the met. i was amazed at the size of her work. i had always only seen her in books, of course, being from arkansas. she was very influential in my early aspirations as an artist, as was nan goldin. i have books on both if you would like me to bring them to the underground.
I fail to think of Cindy Sherman as an artist.Her making a video or a movie or a retrospective only reinforces this feeling. Her process has several traits of a performance art. Her photo are just not art to me.It troubles me for anyone to consider her pictures as art photos. I am open to attempting to understand her appeal, but have yet to find a single photo done by her that I feel is artistic. I feel that those curators who decided that her photos are supposed to be understood as art need to explain why they think of her photos as artistic.Perhaps I am just lost about what is actually art?I am a photographer and feel her use of photography as an art diminishes it.