What is Fine Art Photography?

[jamesrayenz]

Perhaps a better way to work toward an understanding of what we mean by fine art photography is to work toward it negatively.

I can see that the technical manner of the Billingham photograph is at odds with the kind of photography that most people who contribute to this site are interested in.

Could we then agree that the term 'fine art photography' as used on this site won't include photography that is deliberately technically very limited? It doesn't mean that if it is unaccomplished technically, it isn't important art - just that it's not the kind of art to which LL attends. (One thing that brought me to this site, and continues to amaze me, is the high degree of technical and craft-based expertise available on this site - incredible.)

So, IF we can agree on that (!), how about another form of photograph that we can exclude? What else is NOT fine art photography as the term's used on this site?

[ap4a]

Originally Posted by jamesrayenz

Could we then agree that the term 'fine art photography' as used on this site won't include photography that is deliberately technically very limited?

I wouldn't. I find a lot of artistic merit in lofi work, particularly lomo style, and often find it more pleasing than the sometimes sterile view of the world that we often produce via digital.

[digitalvirgin]

You cannot place subject matter and personal preference for a type of image in a box classed "fine art". The very term "fine art" is so badly abused and used by wanna be's as a marketing tool to try and be different. It refers to nothing more than the guide set out for archival purposes.
Is an image taken on a Holga camera, blurred, badly composed, qualify as "naff art".
Does an image taken with a bag of camera equipment costing more than my first house make the image "fine art"? Or is it only fine art because Mr. Ploppyface of Ryegate termed it "fine art" because he liked it? There is no real justification for terming an image "fine art" other than its archival properties. It can never and should never be used to describe a particular type and style of image, colour, black and white or even digital!

[the3dge]

For me it's really all a question of aesthetics. Fine Art can be described as something which is not ulititarian or commercial in nature. For me it comes down to the purpose of the image. If I look at it and enjoy it for no other purpose than that then it is art. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy commercial images. Also when a commercial image has served it's purpose can it then go on to become art. I certainly think so. What about the images David Bailey took for Vogue in the sixties. Their commercial value has long since disappeared with the changing times and they could now be considered to have a documentary value as they represent a period in our recent past but I simply enjoy looking at them for the pleasure they invoke.

[Oldbearchris]

It's hard to be original, but pushing the boundaries to create a powerful style, maybe extending subject matter within a genre, while conveying meaning. Iconic examples of this are what end up in galleries.

[AndyStevens]

If you read magazine articles on the 'how to create fine art' it would appear that anything with minimalist composition, high contrast B&W and square cropped is 'fine art'. Or those using a 10-stop ND.

Or to put it like a local gallery, similar images to my first sentence with a much higher than normal price tag

Seriously though, I think 'fine art' means so many things to so many different people that it's difficult to pigeon hole it - perhaps 'fine art' = 'Wow factor' ??

[OldBoy]

I always thought fine art photography was pictures of nude woman, usually in black and white whilst, glamour photography was in colour.

[Oldbearchris]

Originally Posted by OldBoy

I always thought fine art photography was pictures of nude woman, usually in black and white whilst, glamour photography was in colour.

Brilliant quote!

We had a long discussion on this on the old DC mag site. Shall I go through it again, or did we have enough of it last time?

I notice that DC mag haven't done another 'Fine Art - girls with their knockers out' issue since, so perhaps I got the point across?

[ABERS]

Nice bit of Spam!

[Cathus]

anything someone wants to sell that isn't sports, journalism or porn