"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> schreef in bericht 
news:4a87edee$1@news.povray.org...
> Alain wrote:
>> A agree with you about the cat's photo. Not artistic at all but an
>> obviously bad focus.
>
>  How do you know the original intentions of the photographer? Maybe he
> wanted the focus to be exactly as shown in the photo, for artistic
> purposes. *You* might not find much artistic appeal in his decision, but
> that's just a subjective question of opinion.

Ah! This is a difficult and simple discussion at the same time. Of course, 
everyone is allowed to do as he/she likes best for any purpose he/she 
choses. However, art is not about doing whatever you want and call it "art". 
There should be - at least - a certain "something" which appeals to a random 
and miscellaneous group of (at least a bit) knowledgeable observers before a 
piece is considered part of the artistic domain. If not, really everything 
could be called art, killing art in the process and putting kitch in its 
place. Would you consider the ubiquitous "tearful child" or "busty gypsy" as 
art? Probably not. Still, many people love them enough to put them on their 
walls, and thus indeed a subjective question of opinion at large, but not if 
one has taken the trouble or the time to learn/understand what art is really 
about.

Consider the cat. When looking at a photograph, or a painting, one wants to 
understand the intentions of the artists (not always clear, I agree). Why 
did he do this? Or why did he not do that? Here, the whole image is out of 
focus except part of a paw. What is the intention? What is the message? What 
does it tell me? There is nothing interesting happening in that particular 
part of the image that needs focussing. However, if instead the eyes had 
been focussed sharply and the rest of the cat slightly out of focus, the 
image would have gained in intensity. It would not have been a wow image, 
but certainly a more interesting one. But why not simply photograph the cat 
sharply and leave it at that? The personality of the animal is more than 
enough to make the shot attractive without extra add-ons.

All this said without intentions to hurt whoever took the photograph. This 
is the kind of analysis one would get in any photography or art class in the 
world

Thomas

Post a reply to this message