|
Is digital photography from Photoshop art? This
variation of the hoary question "Is photography art?" is a
debate gaining momentum.
Conventional photography is accepted as a
legitimate art medium, attested to by the prices for works by
masters such as Man Ray, Weston, Ansel Adams, Diane Arbus and
hundreds more.
Acceptance of a photographer's work as art
begins with the individual's vision and ability to transform it
to an image: in other words, creativity. Another step is through
publication, although not all published photographers are
artists. Then there is exhibition and purchase by collectors.
The art world has been slow to embrace digital
photography for several reasons. First is the role of the
computer. For many years, "computer art" has been hallmarked by
outer space themes with floating 3D spheres, star fields and
ephemeral glows. Fine for a screen saver but not exactly the
theme the collector wants for his walls.
Second is presentation. For some reason, art and
huge size are considered to go hand-in-hand and the digital
photographer has been limited to the output of inkjet printers
or very expensive giclee devices.
Third is the very real concern of permanency. No
one actually knows how long an inkjet or giclee print will last
on a wall. Manufacturers make estimated claims for archival
quality of their papers and inks based upon accelerated tests.
Of course permanency has been a problem for artists since the
first prehistory artist scratched into a chalk wall in a French
cave.
Some art critics exhibit confusion between the
quality of images created with pixels and those made up of
grains of silver salts. Digital is simply another photographic
medium and I'm happy that more photographers using that medium
are being accepted as artists without resorting to glowing
spheres and specular highlights.
In this column, I'll examine the work of two
such artists from the UK. While neither is purely a digital
photographer, each exhibits incredible skill in Photoshop.
"Money Talks" Catherine McIntyre © 2000
Catherine McIntyre whose haunting photo collages
include digital photos, scanned photos and found objects, nude
figures (often her own), and a great application of imagination
with Photoshop skills and understanding. A Scottish graphic
designer with a traditional art background, Catherine's
intepretations of themes from dreams to time are spectacular in
their shocking elements and their use of nearly monochromatic
color. You can see examples of her widely published creations at
her home page:
http://members.madasafish.com/~cmci/ or at
www.intangible.org/Features/mcintyre/mcihome.html.
On her website, Catherine describes the
evolution of her work from the traditional live studio through
her discovery of Photoshop: "The layering techniques available
in Photoshop were a revelation. Initial attempts at collage had
always been restricted by the given scale and colour of found
objects and photographs, and by the physical problems of
attachment; translucency, too, was not a variable. In Photoshop,
there are no such restrictions."
Although the major body of her work has been
done with conventional cameras and scanners, Catherine now uses
a Canon Powershot S40 digital camera as well.
"The Crab That Played," Sandy Garnder © 2000
Another digital artist is Sandy Gardner, a
British artist who works in themes very similar to McIntyre's.
Indeed, the two may serve as inspiration for each other. At the
present time, Gardner does not use a digital camera.
Gardner's photo collages are marked by a broader
use of vivid color, elements from nature, and effective use of
various distortion techniques. A visit to her home page at
http://sandygardner.co.uk makes a very interesting comparison to
the work of McIntyre.
Especially noteworthy are Sandy's illustrations
for the book "The World of Fairies," which can be seen in
Gallery 2 on her website.
In future columns, I would like to feature other
digital photographers who work in the realm of fine arts. If you
have a nomination, please email me at jsaurian@tampabay.rr.com. |