Well... I was speaking from the point of view of art as it was made before photography. Though we use the term `art' to describe both that which came before and

Well... I was speaking from the point of view of art as it was made before photography. Though we use the term `art' to describe both that which came before and after photography, functionally they are different. The same can be said of folk art and salon art. This causes heaps of confusion when discussing the two. I believe (though I may be wrong) that you are using the term as a signifier of esteem (kinda 'this is so good it is art'). I have taught fine art photographers, some of the best in Asia. I have seen no problem calling it art. I have worked in art schools for 1,000,000 years. Believe me when I say that I have seen just about everything presented as an art work (off the top of my head, public sex performance, vandalism of other people's art, playing football, covering your studio space with excrement etc). The real question then is: `art or not, is it any good? Does it have value?'