6 ms·
Human literature won't be completely replaced, same way photography and print didn't replace painting. They just outgrew it billion times (in volmue at least) a
by scotty79 2mo ago
Human literature won't be completely replaced, same way photography and print didn't replace painting. They just outgrew it billion times (in volmue at least) and the humanity is richer for it.
- latexr 2mo agoHumanity is richer because photography outgrew painting? How do you figure? I’m not judging or disagreeing, I’m just interested in the argument. On a utilitarian sense, no doubt a photography is more useful than a painting. But in the artistic/creative sense (what the conversation is about), I’m not sure the case is that clear-cut, hence the question.
- scotty79 2mo ago> But in the artistic/creative sense (what the conversation is about), I’m not sure the case is that clear-cut, hence the question. Art for me is joy (or in wider definition emotion) of the beholders (and the creators). The sum of joy (and other emotions) that people derive from making, sharing and viewing photos manyfold exceeds sum of emotional value that paintings deliver.