There are some that claim an airbrush painting is not art, there are also those that claim that a photograph is not art. These options are based on the concept that a machine or an instrument is responsible for the end result, and bear little or no evidence of the artistic skill of its user. Today, when taking photos is so ubiquitous, do we need artists any longer? Who needs a portrait artist when you can snatch up your phone, take a photo, connect the phone to the printer, or take out its memory card and place that in the printer and print out a copy. (The computer as not used at all in this instance). Where will the professional portrait photographer be in the future? But getting back to my earlier comments, how far are we going to go in stating that the artist must not use a "machine" to create, is not a brush a machine?
Or is there a difference between a machine and a tool? And when is a tool not a machine?
No comments:
Post a Comment