Just in case someone is about to spend hard-earned money on a course!
I'm often taken a back when I hear of all the training being offered to make "technically perfect images and prints" by this or that Guru. While basic knowledge
is needed, there is no great technical barrier to overcome! So I'd like to take advantage of the declaration by this German Gentleman to discuss the topic with view to people being less vulnerable to such technobators!
Someone in Germany with bigger brains than I recently wrote on "digital fine art photography":
It is the art to capture the technically perfect picture, followed by the optimum in post processing, and the best possible print output.
I would not sign that, and I guess I am asking, would you?
My thoughts are, this is too much of a limitation, striving only for "perfection" with the tools currently available, the latter change quickly as we know.
We can trace back to Graham Nash to define the roots. Today, is a description that is focused exclusively on technical perfection accurate?
Well Georg,
I'm glad you tell the guy was a German or I'd have been pointing fingers elsewhere! The term
Digital fine Art can be referring to someone's master class, course, work camp or "School of Thought", so I'd like to not face that head on. Let me approach an answer this way. First let's break down digital fine art to two essential components about which we do know a lot.
"Fine Art" here encompasses several schools of thought as to what that might be. Simply put, (just for this discussion, but I promise we'll deal with this more honorably), "Fine Art" pictures are that which are displayed in museums, collected by collectors, sold in galleries or displayed in public buildings or homes.
The digital part is where there's confusion.
a. First let's dispose of the printing! In the digital age we can make prints of technical high standard on archival paper with relative ease. We can if we wish use the digital file to make a film inter-negative or else user a laser to expose film or regular silver gelatin paper. So the print method, itself, unless from a master printer of alternative or B&W photography, for example, can essentially be forgotten as any barrier to making the "Fine Art".
b. What part of this might be related what we call fine art? Obviously we do need
some image file!
But we haven't said what "Fine Art" is! Let's side track, for a moment and pretend! So just for the sake of this discussion, let's produce well-made prints that "seem like fine art" (i.e. subjects, genre and styles that are popular with some market segment of the museum or gallery world). Let's imagine that all one has to do is market them to the galleries and museums and we'd be eventually able to sell our treasured prints. Then obviously, what we sold was indeed "Fine Art"
Well, life's not fair and it immediately shows here! Sorry guys, we can't find one gallery that needs another digital artist. "We already have a full stable of artists, never mind "Digital" Fine Artists!" or some such reply. So we can make a website, self-publish a book, marry the daughter of the gallery owner or get a restaurant to decorate their walls for free with our framed "art". Now we sell some prints! Tralalala!
But are you selling
fine art? Well, it looks like the sort of stuff that everyone else is showing and selling. Not having really defined "fine art" except in a circumlocuitous fashion, let's again feel we understand that our "Fine Art" we have sold, seems to be selling as the real thing from Art Galleries, so we no longer need to worry about the term, just making even better prints in that same vein.
Let's now get back to the aggravatingly bold statement on "fine art"
It is the art to capture the technically perfect picture, followed by the optimum in post processing, and the best possible print output.
Relationship of technically perfect capture to fine art: It is to me patently absurd that a technically perfect picture (for "Art") can be even contemplated! Even in the act of contemplation, there will be doubts, uncertainties and lack of knowledge for a ruler to be made or imagined against which "perfect" could be measured. So "perfect" has to be dismissed. How about replacing perfect with "a technically very good capture"? Again this is a naive assertion because it seems to limit the creativity of the photographic artist who might prefer otherwise. Some talented person may require a digital capture which is under-exposed, over-exposed or has random light variation because that makes his/her creative juices flow! If all art needed was a "technically perfect capture", (and one would even be happy with a technically excellent capture), then every $150 digicam owner could set the camera to Auto and make "fine art" with little effort. After all, the file will be excellent and we've already dismissed printing (for this argument only) as almost a trivial last step.
So what sort of capture is needed? Simply this: whatever capture provides a digital file that inspires and drives the photographic artist who
already has sufficient:
- Openness to new experience
- Imagination
- Intellect
- Originality
- Thinking,
- Motivation
- Discipline
- Playfulness
- Humor
- Passion
- Hubris
- Arrogance
- Insight
- Blind drive
- Informed drive
- Taste
- Skill
- Ability to experiment, fiddle and discover new paths
- Ability to settle on one idea and form some intention
- Ability to kill one's children
- Ability to engrave intent in an image
- Judgment
- Taste
- Iterative refinement and finally a measure of
- Genius to reach part of one's mind mix magic to make the picture live. That way, art has an existence in and for the minds of admirers. Then the art no longer depends on the continued life of the artist.
That picture could be blurred, poorly focused, sickly color or magnificently drawn. None of these technical matters alone will make it fine art without more than a few of the other far more difficult to acquire capabilities mentioned above. Furthermore, lack of such technical proficiency, will hardly ever prevent a talented photographic artist's work reaching the level of appreciation by collectors of "fine art".
Being a teacher! Is that what this declaration is all about? Yes, I think so! A merely competent teacher of photography, can make a great living selling the concept of "Digital Fine Art" to myriads of photo-enthusiasts. Usually the lessons are practical. However, the gurus push there wares! The seven things for this or the 5 secrets of that! Wait, there's more!
Any
talented photographer can quickly acquire sufficient technical skills to make fine art. Beware of gurus and so many courses. Each of us will get much more incremental benefit by going to museums and galleries than by taking most courses. (One should only take a course after one has completed a new project or else one can become a seminar junkie. Still a course is a place for meeting new folk and can be a needed break from hard work.).
So beyond setting up the psychological groundwork for selling course work/ training materials etc to students, the concept of Fine Art:
It is the art to capture the technically perfect picture, followed by the optimum in post processing, and the best possible print output.
is such a poor description of the means by which fine art is made, that I must declare that assertion as so simplistic that it's of little practical value and in short, nonsense! We don't need to be ordained like a priest! A camera is a today merely a commodity. Digital processing is now no real barrier and adequately high quality printing is no longer the domain of the apprenticed printer.
So what makes "Fine Art" What
is special is
refining and developing some of the talents listed above and these are mostly inspired, fertilized and realized by both study of other art and by work and dedication to the life each image one tries to make. By this I mean the devotion and iterative passion with which one cares for a son or daughter. We imagine and dream of the child. Even after conception we seem to "will" it to develop from an embryonic fragile idea to get a beating heart . We treasure it from before it's born to birth, its first steps and each stage of joy until the infant is suddenly an adult. Then that adult takes a deep breath looks us in the eye and and departs on an independent journey. When a photograph is like that, it's fine art! I don't believe much of that can be taught. It can, however, be inspired in others.
The folk who do that are treasures and you just have to seek them out and work with them!
Asher