David Bollt wrote:
I say... craftsmanship, imagination, creative intention and above all... GOOD TASTE.

Are you creating images that seem like real art? How much of what you see at Model Mayhem seems like art to you? What do you think makes an image a work of art, as opposed to just a photograph or a picture of a model?

"We stand in awe before that which can not be seen... And we respect, with every fiber, that which can not be explained."- Rukia, (And so fell the sword of fate...) opening words of Bleach

To me a photograph is art. I am never believed in being boxed in by things like good taste, or someone else's definition of art.

Drew Smith Photography wrote:
One of my favourite quotes:

"No, it (love) is a word. What matters is the connection the word implies."

From a conversation about 'love'.

So it is with 'art'; it's just a word that has a connection. The connection is different for all of us.

Some of us feel the need to have others tell us it is 'art' and others don't care what anybody else thinks.

Bravo!

David Bollt wrote:

I don't think it will ever be truly defined, but I want to hear what people experience as great art. Screw the collective definition. What moves any single person.

The viewer brings beauty into the world... not the image. What has the experience of art show up for you... in your world?

There are so many senses that art will affect.  some are totally emotional and others are more temporal. 

There is one portrait, I'm pretty sure was by Robert Mapplethorpe. Maybe someone here can find a link. I'm pretty sure I saw a portrait of his.   I think it was Jackson Pollack's wife.  Whoever the woman, it was a profile portrait. She had a hooked nose, no discernible chin and very pronounced lips.  She had what some might say was an unfortunate profile.

But she had such confidence in her expression that that she looked incredible in stature and very comfortable with herself.  I've always admired Mapplethorpe's work but that portrait seemed to me, to be the ultimate portrait.  To me it truly captured the inner beauty.

MesmerEyes Photography wrote:
Art can not be put in a box. If only one person in the world considers something art then to them it is art.
Bravo!

I think a healthy majority of us realise that it's subjective. What do YOU think art is? That was part of the original post and i thnik it is worth answering, even for personal insight.

Don-Jones wrote:
One of the best clear-cut examples I can use is Normal Rockwell.  He had technique, we recognized what he created, and there was always an emotional truth.

Not so much for me, I consider him more of a commercial illustrator. Alice Neel defines what a true artist is to me. There's a documentary on Netflix about her.

Kevin Stenhouse wrote:

I think a healthy majority of us realise that it's subjective. What do YOU think art is? That was part of the original post and i thnik it is worth answering, even for personal insight.

To me if it speaks to me either on an emotional or intellectual level or it tells a story then it's art.

The F-Stop wrote:
It's art if you had fun doing it..... there's an art to having fun.


If it seemed like work. it isn't art... it's a job!

Do you know many working artists?  People who make their livelihood (or a portion of it) by means of their art?  It is a job...  It can be a highly rewarding one, but it is still work.

Terrell Gates wrote:
You tell me.... I just do what I do...

+1

dcsmooth wrote:
Please define art.

Those who don't know the definition of art haven't taken art lessons.

My definition, Art is the expression of intangible ideas, concepts, emotions, or feelings through a tangible media.

You can take a photograph of a building, tree, or a person.  But, you cannot take a picture of "happy" or "sad" because those concepts are intangible.  If I photograph a "happy person" or "sad person" and show that to you instead and your brain makes the connection then the photograph is art.  Sunsets become "peaceful and quiet."  Ship at sea in a storm becomes "angry and contentious."

I once went to an art exhibition where the artist set up a 10 foot long kitty litter box.  That's what we call "bad art."  "Art is in the eye of its beholder" means that if the artist conveys an intangible idea with the viewer, then for that one and only one viewer the art is successful.  Connect with enough viewers and you are a successful artist.  The kitty litter box exhibit did not connect with many people so it's bad art.

Just as there are good photographs and bad photographs, there is good art and bad art.  And, just because people don't know the definition art does not mean the definition does not exist.

hbutz New York wrote:

Those who don't know the definition of art haven't taken art lessons.

And, just because people don't know the definition art does not mean the definition does not exist.

What that definition is and it's usefulness is debatable. It's not like it's carved into stone

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/art-definition/

SPRINGHEEL  wrote:
I've never given it any thought

That's true of loads of people on MM...
But at least you are good at it!

Thomas Dodd wrote:
The typically pretentious response is to say "It is art because I am an artist and I say it is art"
The typical self-deprecating response it to say "It is not for me to judge whether I am an artist or not... I am a photographer or a painter or a sculptor - it is only the perceptions of others that label it Art or merely craft"

Perhaps the real definition is somewhere between the two..

David Bollt wrote:
I say... craftsmanship, imagination, creative intention and above all... GOOD TASTE.

Are you creating images that seem like real art? How much of what you see at Model Mayhem seems like art to you? What do you think makes an image a work of art, as opposed to just a photograph or a picture of a model?

I'd like to think I am.  What makes it art?  That I care about the outcome, and that sometimes, my work has an impact on the viewer.

I have no idea if it's in "good taste."  That's incredibly subjective.  I had one image called porn today, and another, fairly similar image, called wonderful art.  I think they're both art, that was certainly the intention.

Ben Hinman wrote:
Art is never self conscious. Art does not care what people think or how people feel about it. Art is truth spread through lies, brush strokes and shadows and images and sounds. Art is a feeling that thinks or a thought that feels. Art is better than you.

But, most important, it's in "good taste."  Right?

EnlightendedPhotography wrote:
Do you think I am creating art?

The question is . . . Do YOU think you are creating art?

If you think so, then you are.

If not, then you aren't

David Bollt wrote:
That seems fashionably dismissive. I was just rocked by your portfolio and did not see anything in there that occurred to me as less than remarkable art.

i doubt there's anything remotely fashionable about me. i wrote exactly what i feel about it. i think a couple others here did too. most though, just blathering the same old inanities, rather than digging out and expressing things they feel that might be politically incorrect, or antagonistic.

Carlos Occidental wrote:
My images themselves may or may not be art.  But, the way I print them (hand coated cyanotypes and platinum/palladium) makes them fine art, and allows me to sell them as such.

Wait.  So, if I printed say, this (yes, it's my shot, and it's SFW, just not worth bothering to do the code to show it.)
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2150/2272 … eb05_o.jpg

with "(hand coated cyanotypes and platinum/palladium)" it would make it fine art?  And I could sell it as such?

There has to be more to it than that.

Ken Marcus Studios wrote:

The question is . . . Do YOU think you are creating art?

If you think so, then you are.

If not, then you aren't

René Descartes I think said someting similiar.....but with a traumatic brain injury sometimes I am not sure and get confused what I read and type.   You definately are creating art.

SPRINGHEEL  wrote:
I've never given it any thought

LOL

Mys Britt

aquarelle wrote:
I'm an "Artist."  So what I make is "Art."  It has to be, right?  I mean I wouldn't be an "Artist" if I wasn't making "Art."  That's how it's supposed to be, right?



I mean, it is, right?



Isn't it?

Yes, it is.