4 ms·
> the handful of men who invented photography — only wanted to capture images from light reflected on a solid surface There’s absolutely no need to portray som
by antiterra 4y ago
> the handful of men who invented photography — only wanted to capture images from light reflected on a solid surface
There’s absolutely no need to portray someone like Daguerre as merely a uninspired technician. I’m genuinely baffled why this is the narrative tack the author took.
From wikipedia:
> Louis Daguerre was born in Cormeilles-en-Parisis, Val-d'Oise, France. He was apprenticed in architecture, theatre design, and panoramic painting to Pierre Prévost, the first French panorama painter. Exceedingly adept at his skill of theatrical illusion, he became a celebrated designer for the theatre, and later came to invent the diorama, which opened in Paris in July 1822.
- wussboy 4y agoThanks for this "other side". I'm a technician (I build bots!) but I like to think there is a sense of art to what I do.
- jfoutz 4y agoSo, historically, and I'd say even today, a lot of art is pretty technical. imagine you're sitting around in 1550 and decide to paint a painting, you've got to gather up some boar bristles to make your brushes. You've got to source some lapis lazuli for a nice rich blue. Maybe some cadmium for red, and suspend all that into some sort of oil. Furthermore, a lot of historical art, like ceramics was really practical. At the root of it, folks wanted a way to carry around liquids. There's a lot of tricks around clay and glazing to make something. to our modern ears, a silversmith makes jewelry, but really they'd spend a lot of time making forks and spoons and such. I can't really answer the question "what is art?". but I feel really comfortably saying an artist is someone who tries to pull off a task, the cool way. I know that's vague. But anybody who's good at anything will know there's a way that'll work for sure, and there's another way that's, just, cooler. A flourish of skill that probably no one will ever notice, but is really really neat. I don't know you, and I don't know your work. But if you ever want to call your self an artist, there's at least one other person out there that would agree with you.
- hypertexthero 4y agoMake that two people! It took me a long time to learn that the process is what making art is about.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ekianjo 4y agoWikipedia is also not a reliable source. Its written by humans.
- noahtallen 4y agoSo would every other source ;)
- willis936 4y agoNot the news articles generated by bots that take in words written by humans then run them through a lawnmower. Now that's what I consider a reliable source.
- ekianjo 4y agoSo why do we cite wikipedia like its written by a higher power or something. Wikipedia content is hardly difficult to hack in one way or another as proven times and times over.
- leephillips 4y ago“We” don’t; those who do take at least a mild hit to their credibility.
- antiterra 4y agoNo one is citing it as a higher power, simply an easily accessed central repository. I didn’t fly to France to verify it as a primary source for a comment thread but I already knew Daguerre was an artist. This isn’t an academic paper.
- BLKNSLVR 4y agoThis comment sounds like it also belongs in the 'the map is not the terrain' discussion.
- antiterra 4y agoAs a quick reference for easily verifiable biography in an internet discussion forum, it’s fine. If you want more proof, then fly to Bry-Sur-Marne and interrogate everyone there about the provenance of the only existing Daguerre panorama. https://museedebry.fr/#/homepage-daguerre/en https://museedebry.fr/#/homepage-daguerre/en