What is the true nature of digital photography? Many people have been asking this question for a long period of time. Actually when people ask the query about the true nature of digital photography, they frequently mean to ask if it is art or it is science.
Here are some arguments for both sides:
A) Art - many people consider digital photography as an art because it caters for an expression of emotion. They think that digital photography is a carrying on of the art of drawing or painting. You see, digital photography is like painting in the way that even though it does take accurate photos of reality, it also allows for some alteration through the varied digital tools now available.
Even without the editing many people still think that digital photography is art due to the fact that it does take an artist's eye to find a great topic of digital photography. The nature of digital photography as a skill has a link with the proven fact that an artist can express emotions and statements thru visual subjects.
The adherents of the "artistic nature of digital photography" also argue their case by stating its ability to convey emotional messages thru aesthetics. The beauty of each picture, of course, needs also to be credited to the individual taking the footage. One of the most powerful debates for the inventive nature of digital photography is the fact that the picture is rarely actually what is seen with the eye. Through the camera and PC, an individual can alter the image so as to present what he or she wants to show.
B) Science - some people argue that science is the true nature of digital photography. One argument is that photography, unlike painting, essentially comes from something existing and not from a painters mind or emotion. This may be very persuasive since, indeed, a shooter doesn't actually make pictures. She just takes them.
Another argument about the systematic nature of digital photography is the undeniable fact that the editing that folks do and adjustments that photographers make are based mostly on a collection of steps that may be narrowed down scientifically. People who disagree for the scientific nature of digital photography may reason the same series of steps can be taken in order to achieve the same result. There is a certain quality of constancy about digital photography that renders it a science.
But what's the true nature of digital photography? We have read the diverse debates supporting science and art. There seems to be no answer to this question, right?
The true nature of digital photography will always remain to be a paradox. This suggests that though it can be regarded as an art, it can also be regarded as a science. When is the ambiguity of the nature of digital photography solved? Well, it is answered when a person takes a digital photograph.
The true nature of digital photography lies in the hands of the individual that takes the photographs. The way someone treats the method defines the nature of digital photography for her or him. It isn't totally art nor is it totally science. The true nature of digital photography is an enigma. It may seem to be contradictory, nonetheless it is somehow correct.
Here are some arguments for both sides:
A) Art - many people consider digital photography as an art because it caters for an expression of emotion. They think that digital photography is a carrying on of the art of drawing or painting. You see, digital photography is like painting in the way that even though it does take accurate photos of reality, it also allows for some alteration through the varied digital tools now available.
Even without the editing many people still think that digital photography is art due to the fact that it does take an artist's eye to find a great topic of digital photography. The nature of digital photography as a skill has a link with the proven fact that an artist can express emotions and statements thru visual subjects.
The adherents of the "artistic nature of digital photography" also argue their case by stating its ability to convey emotional messages thru aesthetics. The beauty of each picture, of course, needs also to be credited to the individual taking the footage. One of the most powerful debates for the inventive nature of digital photography is the fact that the picture is rarely actually what is seen with the eye. Through the camera and PC, an individual can alter the image so as to present what he or she wants to show.
B) Science - some people argue that science is the true nature of digital photography. One argument is that photography, unlike painting, essentially comes from something existing and not from a painters mind or emotion. This may be very persuasive since, indeed, a shooter doesn't actually make pictures. She just takes them.
Another argument about the systematic nature of digital photography is the undeniable fact that the editing that folks do and adjustments that photographers make are based mostly on a collection of steps that may be narrowed down scientifically. People who disagree for the scientific nature of digital photography may reason the same series of steps can be taken in order to achieve the same result. There is a certain quality of constancy about digital photography that renders it a science.
But what's the true nature of digital photography? We have read the diverse debates supporting science and art. There seems to be no answer to this question, right?
The true nature of digital photography will always remain to be a paradox. This suggests that though it can be regarded as an art, it can also be regarded as a science. When is the ambiguity of the nature of digital photography solved? Well, it is answered when a person takes a digital photograph.
The true nature of digital photography lies in the hands of the individual that takes the photographs. The way someone treats the method defines the nature of digital photography for her or him. It isn't totally art nor is it totally science. The true nature of digital photography is an enigma. It may seem to be contradictory, nonetheless it is somehow correct.
About the Author:
Stephen Spreadbury works for industrial and commercial companies as a media specialist. He uses his skills as a product photographer to shoot complex product photography images to help expand his customers market presence.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar