Entrez Vous?

IMG00097-1919

So this is a photo taken at about 7pm last evening. When I looked at the cellphone screen, I immediately thought of bright light; the bright light you might see as you die or pass onto the next plane of existence. And the sign in the bottom left hand corner I consciously put in the frame so there would be a pull and a counter-pull in the photo. To me a photo that says something beyond just what it shows is art. Simply evoking a feeling cannot make it art, IMHO, because it reflects only reality. The art therefore is in the existence, not in its capture.

Saying that, composition, certain angles of reality and lighting times can turn a photo into art. This is the first time I think also, that I have deliberately used the cellphones limitations and differences to make a photo. For some reason the Blackberry Storm really takes stellar pictures of the sky and sunsets. I’m going to do another first and try and make a print out of this 3.2MP photo. (This is a scaled down version)

Two other related images at the jump.

IMG00096-1918

IMG00094-1917

  • But one of the primary aspects of art is in the experience. Since “art” is an arbitrary label, like time, it rather needs to be seen/heard/experienced in some way to validate ITS existence. So the capture is vital if the art is to be anything less than a fleeting memory.
    Nice pic.

  • Temple

    There’s a school of thought that true art is transitory. “Nice pic?” LOL.

    Yeah, defining art is one of those things that give me a headache :D. Primarily because by some definitions art can be damn near anything on the planet, any event, any sound, any thing – if it’s captured or noted somehow. Silence can indeed be art – it’s all in the way it’s presented. One person’s artful silence is most people’s, trying to be artistic and failing because of, as you say, the presentation or the capture.

  • Temple

    Doesn’t mean it’s not valuable and learning won’t come from trying to define it. Just that “it” most definitely will not always be art no matter how the “artist” tries to say it is.

    Is art the attempt to justify existence?

  • I don’t believe existence is justifiable. It’s our human brains trying to apply an inadequate system of classification and logic to something that is unclassifiable and illogical. It just is.
    Art is like that. Had you not taken that picture, the artistry of that vision you had would only have been in your mind, unshared. Now that you have the picture, it’s in your mind, and mine, and available to be shown and shared and discussed. So maybe the capture isn’t part of the art, it’s just the way the art is known. After all, Beethoven is still art when it’s live and not recorded.
    But really, trying to classify something as “art” is like trying to define time. It’s arbitrary, it’s personal, it’s completely irrelevant to the rest of the universe. It just is.
    Yeah, it was nice. Looking forward to seeing it framed. ;-)

  • How’s your head? ;-)

  • Temple

    The very art of organizing is a different form of justification.

    If 500 people see art being created and then erased it was still art.

    Public art, even. Institutional art, no.

    Art is a medium – she can communicate with other worlds beyond your understanding.

    (“your”, general)

    Heads fine. I just had a similar discussion about the difficulty in defining feminism. It’s ever-changing, it means different things to different people and it’s presented in any number of beautiful and ugly ways.

    Eye of the beholder, 1066 and all that

  • I think art is a state of mind. If the artist creates that art with 500 people watching, and HE thinks it’s art, but none of them do, is it still art? Depends on who you ask.
    Defining feminism is easy. ;-)
    1066 refers to? (I googled and came up with the generally agreed upon beginning of the Middle Ages, but not sure if that’s what you meant.)

  • Ken Baker

    Why not just get a Dictionary? It will define almost anything you want. Oh but then you will only have one definition.
    Is Art only Art when it is so deamed by a popular group of professional Know-it-all-ist? (with extra income) Can you and I define Art and thereby making it so? Do we always need to have a general consensus in order for “IT” to “BE” called Art? These and many other interesting questions will soon be answered at your local institute of higher learning. Go to college if you want to be capable of defining Art.
    Atleast have your GED. Yuk yuk yuk.
    Hi Temple.
    Love your site.
    PS: This comment IS ART! Totally fabricated by me.