3 ms·

Most of what you've named are what I meant by "generalized as journalism", i.e. as objective documentation of one form or another. I was just trying to point ou

Most of what you've named are what I meant by "generalized as journalism", i.e. as objective documentation of one form or another. I was just trying to point out that art as self-expression wasn't and has never been photography's primary "use". Good point though.

001sky 14y ago
This is still prety far off base, historically. The most important contemporary art (as a genre) right now is photography. Its most popular movement, loosley called the 'New Topographics.' The 'origins' of 'topograpgic' photography, as a style, date well back into the 19th century, however. I think that says enough.
- mturmon 14y ago
  "The most important contemporary art (as a genre) right now is photography." First, the truth status of this sweeping statement is hard to assess, but I think it's more wrong than right. If you had to complete your sentence "The most important...", I think you'd better put installation, or perhaps conceptual art, rather than photography. It would be better not to make such statements at all -- doing so combines two notoriously slippery concepts, "art" and "most important". (If we can't define art, and good luck doing it, then defining most important art is well out of reach.) Anyway, you and the comment above you are talking across each other. You're saying that photography is important to contemporary art. jberryman is saying that the most common use cases of photography are not art, and tend to be documentary, not aesthetic. Both of you can be right.
  - 001sky 14y ago
    Topographics stems from the 19th century as historical fact. The rest of your post is just full of bluster. [1] Both the market and art-history have already conceded as much. So, I'm not sure what you are looking at, or what price point you are at, or what your vested interests are. Its honestly irrelevant. It would be better not to make such statements at all... -- As you said. http://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/hyman-writing.jpg http://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/hyman-writing.jp... _____________________ [1] Citations for context, if you need them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_photographs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_photogra... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhein_II http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhein_II http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Topographics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Topographics Non-topographic 19th Century art with 20th C influence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cameron_julia_jackson.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cameron_julia_jackson.jpg _________ Is "Photography is at the cutting edge of contemporary art"? http://www.amazon.com/Why-Photography-Matters-Never-Before/dp/0300136846 http://www.amazon.com/Why-Photography-Matters-Never-Before/d... _________ Does art exist? http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Objective_Eye.html?id=LISzaocIPQAC http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Objective_Eye.html?i... __________
    - mturmon 14y ago
      I see quite a lot of art -- not being exhaustive, but for photography, I've been to solo shows by Jeff Wall, Cathy Opie, and Robert Mapplethorpe, as well as various historical shows at the Getty. James Welling, one of the photographers in the book you cite, was on my wife's MFA committee. So I'm utterly unimpressed with your fragmented list of URLs. I didn't say photography was unimportant. I said that it's hard to defend your statement that photography is the most important of the arts. I don't see you defending that statement. I do see you putting words in my mouth, with quotes as if I wrote them ("at the cutting edge"). It's a tautology that photography is at the cutting edge of contemporary art. So is painting. So is multimedia installation. Your last note ("does art exist") is puzzling, because nobody here said art did not exist. I did say it's hard to define, and lots of artists are working to keep it that way. Is a sculpture made of fingernail clippings art (http://strose.lunaimaging.com:8180/luna/servlet/detail/StRosesr1~23~23~51073~115702:Bird?qvq=w4s:/who/Tim%20Hawkinson/what/sculptures%20(visual%20works)/;lc:StRosesr1~21~21,StRosesr1~23~23&mi=4&trs=11 http://strose.lunaimaging.com:8180/luna/servlet/detail/StRos...)?
      - 001sky 14y ago
        http://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/hyman-writing.jpg http://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/hyman-writing.jp... This is an exhibition catalog excerpt. The artist (from the 1850's) is being exhibited because of his links to XYZ (the guy with the most expensive photograph ever sold at auction, linked above, in 2011). The Guy XYZ is a student of Becher (==New Topographics), the former a Pioneer of the original aesthetic now called Topographic/s. That, in a nutshell is the point I was making. Interesting stuff was happening in the 1800's. In Art. With Photography. I didn't say photography was unimportant. I said that it's hard to defend your statement that photography is the most important of the arts. I don't see you defending that statement. == I don't need to. Its not critical to the point. If you have a true interest in the subject matter, its worth looking into further. I would encourage other HN readers to do the same, if they have an interest in it. The interesting stuff in contemporary photography is well-beyond what you've listed. I'd take that as an opportunity to learn more about the subject, rather than taking it personally. For the most part, it is German and Japanese leading the way. Books are your friend, and an increasingly good investment. http://www.amazon.com/Photobook-History-2-Martin-Parr/dp/0714844330 http://www.amazon.com/Photobook-History-2-Martin-Parr/dp/071...

001sky 14y ago

This is still prety far off base, historically. The most important contemporary art (as a genre) right now is photography. Its most popular movement, loosley called the 'New Topographics.' The 'origins' of 'topograpgic' photography, as a style, date well back into the 19th century, however. I think that says enough.

mturmon 14y ago
"The most important contemporary art (as a genre) right now is photography." First, the truth status of this sweeping statement is hard to assess, but I think it's more wrong than right. If you had to complete your sentence "The most important...", I think you'd better put installation, or perhaps conceptual art, rather than photography. It would be better not to make such statements at all -- doing so combines two notoriously slippery concepts, "art" and "most important". (If we can't define art, and good luck doing it, then defining most important art is well out of reach.) Anyway, you and the comment above you are talking across each other. You're saying that photography is important to contemporary art. jberryman is saying that the most common use cases of photography are not art, and tend to be documentary, not aesthetic. Both of you can be right.
- 001sky 14y ago
  Topographics stems from the 19th century as historical fact. The rest of your post is just full of bluster. [1] Both the market and art-history have already conceded as much. So, I'm not sure what you are looking at, or what price point you are at, or what your vested interests are. Its honestly irrelevant. It would be better not to make such statements at all... -- As you said. http://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/hyman-writing.jpg http://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/hyman-writing.jp... _____________________ [1] Citations for context, if you need them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_photographs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_photogra... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhein_II http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhein_II http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Topographics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Topographics Non-topographic 19th Century art with 20th C influence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cameron_julia_jackson.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cameron_julia_jackson.jpg _________ Is "Photography is at the cutting edge of contemporary art"? http://www.amazon.com/Why-Photography-Matters-Never-Before/dp/0300136846 http://www.amazon.com/Why-Photography-Matters-Never-Before/d... _________ Does art exist? http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Objective_Eye.html?id=LISzaocIPQAC http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Objective_Eye.html?i... __________
  - mturmon 14y ago
    I see quite a lot of art -- not being exhaustive, but for photography, I've been to solo shows by Jeff Wall, Cathy Opie, and Robert Mapplethorpe, as well as various historical shows at the Getty. James Welling, one of the photographers in the book you cite, was on my wife's MFA committee. So I'm utterly unimpressed with your fragmented list of URLs. I didn't say photography was unimportant. I said that it's hard to defend your statement that photography is the most important of the arts. I don't see you defending that statement. I do see you putting words in my mouth, with quotes as if I wrote them ("at the cutting edge"). It's a tautology that photography is at the cutting edge of contemporary art. So is painting. So is multimedia installation. Your last note ("does art exist") is puzzling, because nobody here said art did not exist. I did say it's hard to define, and lots of artists are working to keep it that way. Is a sculpture made of fingernail clippings art (http://strose.lunaimaging.com:8180/luna/servlet/detail/StRosesr1~23~23~51073~115702:Bird?qvq=w4s:/who/Tim%20Hawkinson/what/sculptures%20(visual%20works)/;lc:StRosesr1~21~21,StRosesr1~23~23&mi=4&trs=11 http://strose.lunaimaging.com:8180/luna/servlet/detail/StRos...)?
    - 001sky 14y ago
      http://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/hyman-writing.jpg http://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/hyman-writing.jp... This is an exhibition catalog excerpt. The artist (from the 1850's) is being exhibited because of his links to XYZ (the guy with the most expensive photograph ever sold at auction, linked above, in 2011). The Guy XYZ is a student of Becher (==New Topographics), the former a Pioneer of the original aesthetic now called Topographic/s. That, in a nutshell is the point I was making. Interesting stuff was happening in the 1800's. In Art. With Photography. I didn't say photography was unimportant. I said that it's hard to defend your statement that photography is the most important of the arts. I don't see you defending that statement. == I don't need to. Its not critical to the point. If you have a true interest in the subject matter, its worth looking into further. I would encourage other HN readers to do the same, if they have an interest in it. The interesting stuff in contemporary photography is well-beyond what you've listed. I'd take that as an opportunity to learn more about the subject, rather than taking it personally. For the most part, it is German and Japanese leading the way. Books are your friend, and an increasingly good investment. http://www.amazon.com/Photobook-History-2-Martin-Parr/dp/0714844330 http://www.amazon.com/Photobook-History-2-Martin-Parr/dp/071...