Comments on: 10 Reasons Why Photography Sucks and Isn’t an Art Form

By: Wow

Wow — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:29:12 +0000

I’ll just quote this from the top of the page for people still raging away in the comments:

“This article is #1 in Google for “photography sucks,” so I see why it gets so many comments. Don’t take me too seriously. Photography is really an art form and I am playing devil’s advocate here. “

I too feel that photography really is an art, but I can also take a joke and laugh at some of the negative aspects of photography.

By: Kero

Kero — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 22:08:32 +0000

When you know nothing about art and the kind of knowledge a professional photograph needs in order to create a decent picture, You stfu and be respectful. What you just said is as ignorant as saying that Abstract art sucks because “I could do it on my own”.

By: Kero

Kero — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 22:03:55 +0000

Wow, are you SERIOUS? You better be trolling else you are nothing more than a stupid ignorant.

By: Is the Art of Photography Dying Due to Digitalization? | HowDoDesign

Is the Art of Photography Dying Due to Digitalization? | HowDoDesign — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 06:38:58 +0000

[...] This is just my humble opinion and I might be able to make some of you think of photography as a true form of art. Actually, I can’t think of reasons why photography is NOT an art so I did my research and I found this one site that says “10 Reasons Why Photography Sucks and Isn’t an Art Form“. [...]

By: delta/oil painter

delta/oil painter — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 19:57:34 +0000

I totally disagree with you. There are people that just do not get it. Must be you, huh? Photography as a art is a masterful articulation of each image that everyone cannot do. Could this be you? Yes anyone can take picture with a camera even a box, but those are not the ones we are talking about here. Theses photographers spend hours to get a particular image and a capture of time that will never happen again. Shame on you and your shallow intelligence to make such false statements and to try to influence people who might be interested in studying this. Any form of art should be judged by it’s beauty and meaningfulness visually to the individual . It is the unique piece that brings a stimulating experience to the individual. Trying to define fine art?Fine art ( or art) in general is undefined because it is simply in the eye of the beholder. In conclusion i will just say if a Fine Art photographer is selling his pieces I would say he is now a Professional Artist!!!!!

By: krista_krins

krista_krins — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 02:43:34 +0000

Your a bitter asshole who has NO fucking talent. MOST photographers not all, but about 85% of the ones I know, practice other media. Because they choose to produce work in some media form you dissagree with does not make them any less talented. Fucker, if it weren’t for photographers, who have TALENT and CREATIVITY, publications like Vouge, AltPress, and even Playboy wouldn’t exist. So sit down, stuff you’re mouth and get the fuck over yourself you are what’s wrong with the world

By: james

james — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:15:59 +0000

to be perfectly honest, to me you sound more than just a little bitter. Yes anyone can take a photograph and it will be simple, but it takes great skill and is a craft to be learnt to make a photograph. Its more than just pointing and shooting, its the choices you make to create an outcome you want.

By: riley bere

riley bere — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 13:55:50 +0000

thank god i read this, i a doing a art prject on a career of choice. i chose photogrpahym, and i thank you whoever made this artical it opened my eyes and i no longer plan to persue a career in photography. perhaps film ? i will keep my eyes open fior someone revealing the ugly truth of film , lol

By: Nick

Nick — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 02:01:07 +0000

Photographers, get over it, you are not artists, you are documentarians. You might as well go sit in on an orchestra with a tape recorder and record what is being played, it might sound nice afterwards but it doesn’t make you an artist.

By: dee

dee — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 23:41:08 +0000

Indeed anyone can make photographs, but not everyone can make a GREAT IMAGES.

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:55:47 +0000

I am an engineer and I consider photographers to be afraid of encountering hardships in the field of their choice in life. I mean like, “Why choose photography if you can make Cameras of your own when you’re an engineer? Why photography if you can have better opportunities and so much things to learn on engineering?” Let’s accept the fact that; Photographs are made by Cameras, not by people, which makes them less of what we so call “art”. Cameras are made by engineers, made by people, which makes them what we call pure art. Yes, not everyone can do good photography. It’s probably because their attention is not on the camera most of the time, unlike what we so call “professional photographers” whose attentions are on the camera all the time, but if you give these normal people time to master the camera, at least a day or a two, they can easily kick the butt out of this what we call “professional photographers”. It’s a fact, just accept it. Cameras? They are very easy to master. As I mentioned above, they are made by engineers. I only consider photography as a hobby, not an art nor a profession. ANY PEOPLE CAN BE A PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHER BY LEARNING IT THEMSELVES ALONE, WITHOUT THE NEED OF SCHOOL, BUT NO PEOPLE CAN BE AN ENGINEER, DOCTOR, NURSE, LAWYER WITHOUT THE HELP OF A SCHOOL SO WHY WASTE YOUR TIME TAKING PHOTOGRAPHY COURSE ON A UNVIERSITY?

By: Renée

Renée — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 12:30:18 +0000

And anything IS art. So it has no value today. It just can’t be taken seriously anymore. The more ironic, parodistic the more useless garbage the whole thing. And this because the multiple opinions and ideas which get all granted today as artforms. Yea it is my personal opinion, but I don’t trust art, this world has made me lose trust in almost everything similar.

By: Emily

Emily — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 20:52:34 +0000

Hello, I’m referencing this (and disputing this greatly) in an essay.
Cheers!

By: Renee Williams

Renee Williams — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 06:06:58 +0000

Anything can be art. A person can paint their nude body with paint and call it art. Seeing art is in the eye of the beholder. You might not think someting is art but someone else does. Just as if you think something is art and someone tells you otherwise. Art is art. It can be created, performed or whatever in many ways. Photography is art and does take talent. If you can go to a black room and and be able to produce a photo, that in itself is talent. You say you can’t an artist if you sell your work. Then i guess motzart and ansel adams and other famour artists must not be artists because they sell their work.

By: gali

gali — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 16:23:46 +0000

cant you just say that this is all about opinion? wilde said that all art is useless… well that was his opinion right? and not all people that know about him know about what he tried to say with that…

It seems you don´t really get the entire idea… how sad… but at the end we can´t stay with our opinions, we should evolve… you should do it too… I won´t ask you to do anything but just think, a good photographer must keep his mind open… haha, how funny you are sorry for the bad english I just could not resist…

By: Swaggerman

Swaggerman — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 08:35:29 +0000

This. This all the way.
Most of the arguments against photography and film are made by the incredibly pretentious “Modern Artists” who feel that their art is in danger of deprecation. Art is a business in this day and age. Most of the modern art you see in galleries are by the so called “starving artists” who are simply looking for an easy way to exploit the pretension that thrives in the upper class communtitiy. “Look at what I drew/painted/shat! It means blah blah blah and represents blah blah blah.” “Oh! I must have it in my collection! I’ll give you $(Absurd amount)”

By: mayank

mayank — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 20:32:06 +0000

Thanx for appreciating the writing skill and stopping by to see my post. I am just passionate about photography and have amateurish skills. I came through this post when I was pondering over the question as “What is photography?” . Is it still the traditional form of understanding camera and subject or should it now include the digital art form created through photoshop like software too. I liked the article to be debated and wrote my response in form of blog entry. If you did not like it then also its okay. But I am entitled for my opinion and will participate wherever required as part of larger cause of debate.
One line from the song “The times they a changin ” apt for your comment goes as “Don’t criticize what you cannot understand” .

By: urge

urge — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:43:26 +0000

I saw your writing mister ‘proudofmywritingskills’. not everybody has to aim for a literary award to write down an oppinion. was it really necessary stopping by and posting a comment just to tell how great you are? and you don’t need a research for this subject, its clear enough if you just look around, how do you count together the talentless faces who just get on the wave of shooting a photo and praising themselves? they are numberless!and tell me how do you measure talent? today talent is a matter of self-management.

By: z

Thu, 27 Oct 2011 10:39:35 +0000

Finally!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So sad that I discovered your site only now, I have waited for this since years now. I have felt this in me so long ago, and I had to wait it out to concretize, but know I know that this has been my problem with photograpy all the time after I started to study photography at the university. I can’t say that I regret doing it, but now my diploma isn’t worth shit ’cause everybody is doing photos too. Once I thought it was special and it really takes years of artistic education to do great photos, and to know the technical side too. I’m devastated of the fact that once photography was invented to proove and to share the RAW TRUTH of the moment and happenings. And today this has turned into its direct opposite: you can’t find an ‘artistic’ method of expression that is more untrue, manipulated, altered(they like it more: ‘edited’) even if just by raising contrast, and making so simple and everyday things into dramatic shit that doesn’t add anything new to the world only expresses ones obsession of ‘cool’, dark and pessimistic mystification of what they not even intented to understand. I’m fed up with photography, it’s choking me, images called art, and truly devious ‘artist’ are infesting every single corner(once so peaceful and clean) of the world and pushing ‘their world’ and stupid images in my face, I can’t breathe!!! So if you are against what’s photography’s become(sorry from this point we just cannot go back and praise what once was so pure) aling with me, the battle is on!

By: knuftobor

knuftobor — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 11:52:24 +0000

I have to agree with this article, Mal Quat & JJ. A camera is just a recording device, if I record a singer singing in the street am I the artist for pressing the record button? If I took a picture of the statue of David am I the artist? If I photographed horrible events during a war would the images be art? I would be like a recording engineer or a journalistic photographer. However, I do believe one can use photography as a tool for creating art. Someone made a comment that art is created with the hands & that is not completely true. There are many things in nature that can be considered art which probably makes people think they are an artist because they captured the image. Like nude photography, a beautiful subject & you call it art. That’s OK, it’s natural beauty so it invokes some emotions for some people. Now for Mal & JJ to tell people to stop nude b/w photography or painting just tells me you’re both full of shit! Art is NOT about reinventing the wheel. I too have been into photography since I was around 12 years old, behind the camera and in the dark room. I have also been able to draw very well since I have been a very young child. I do not consider my photography as art, not even my artistic b/w nudes. They are just documented images of nude women that other people call art. There are people now creating beautiful images like Newton & Horst who have never even heard of Newton & Horst. They don’t want to hear you say it’s finished. Mal, you seem to tooting you’re own horn by name dropping very respected ancient artists while discouraging potential young photographers. There may not be any photos the blow away the artists you mentioned but there sure is hell some modern artist that blow them away. You guys obviously have appreciated some art, very predictable art especially JJ, DaVinci, Michelangelo? there are kids these days that have these skills, you speak as if it is futile to pursue art. People enjoy these activities whether you & I think it is art or not. It’s like telling them to stop having sex because it’s already been done. So the bottom line is you can be an artistic photographer or a photojournalist, if you’re going to call it art then make it art don’t just take a picture of the beautiful sunset & say I’m an artist. And as for you Mal & JJ, stop sucking you’re own dick because Ron Jeremy already did it in the 80’s!

By: Minnie

Minnie — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:31:57 +0000

I disagree with your list, but it all seems to stem from the very first reason listed, so I’m only going to address number 1 on your list. Yes, anyone can take a photo, even a monkey, but not every one can take a good photograph, a photograph that is considered art.
Bad to average photography IS easy
Good to great photography is NOT

I think why you feel this way toward photography is partly due to the fact that you are not pushing yourself to create wonderful images, anyone can see that going through your portfolio. Maybe if you tried, and worked on this particular art form, you would be happier with the outcome. Shoot like a monkey and you will get monkey results. Shoot like a photographer/artist and you may just get better images. If you keep your current mindset your photography will never improve and everything on your list will be relevant and true.
I for one, as a beginner, know that my photography will only get better every time I shoot, because I push myself, I push my camera, and I see it as an art form that constantly evolves and changes over time. I think it’s sad, if it’s really true that you love photography like you say, that you are stopping yourself from making good images and are content to keep producing what you do.

By: Is the Art of Photography Dying Due to Digitalization? - sixtendindo

Is the Art of Photography Dying Due to Digitalization? - sixtendindo — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 01:06:04 +0000

By: Gino

Gino — Sat, 24 Sep 2011 04:40:26 +0000

WRONG on all accounts. I will agree that photography can be simple and almost anyone can do it especially in this day of digital photography.
BUT, any honest expression of artistry is art and photography fits the bill. True, being at the right time and recording it on film or digital does not constitute art, but seeing something and composing it, manually setting the exposure to bring out highlights and having details in shadows…..creating a piece of art that not everyone can…. One is an ARTIST.
I started my business in 1958 at 17 and over the years I HAVE photographed things that anyone in my position could have. There are scenes and things that I saw would occur in hours and minutes and being able to respond to that specific time to set in on film make me an artist.
I use both film and digital….prefer film and it is more subtle and I don’t believe in using photoshop although there is a place for it.
In July 1959 I saw a character study of 2 Italian men and I knew it would only be there for less than one second…ART. On Aug 22, 1960 I saw a ocean scene that I knew was happening and that would only be there momentarily….No meter just understanding light and lenses (bruses) I had to put it on film. In 1968 I I saw a photo developing (pun-sorry) with Johnny Carson and Jack Benny I had to show its true expression…GOT It….a piece of art.

Over 50 years I have photographed people and personalities, not just to take a pick-ture of them, but to express them, as a painting would, showing their characteristics and that is something that a painting can’t always do.

A painter,ARTIST, sees something and with his personality and heart puts in on canvas….so to the photographer…………..THUS NO MATTER WHAT YOU MAY THINK PHOTOGRAPHY CAN BE ART

By: Film isn't dead

Film isn't dead — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:23:31 +0000

Film isn’t dead, but it was coughing up blood last night.

No, of course photography isn’t art and CANNOT be art, for reasons you don’t mention. A photograph is a product of nature, not art. It represents a causal chain from the light leaving the sun, reflecting off of an object, passing through a lens, and striking the film. In no way do I catch the light and use my hands. all art is made by hand, not by nature.

By: photohound

photohound — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 00:43:12 +0000

I love taking pictures and photoshoping images to whatever. All art forms, whatever your definition, are beautiful,creative, expressive… as well as full of pretentious bs.
Anyway, too much talk. Go paint, sculpt, play an intrument, sing ,dance enjoy for criss sake. What else matters?