what is a photograph ? # 6-8 ~ photographer or artist or something else?

what is a photograph ~ # 6 • click to embiggen
what is a photograph ~ # 7 • click to embiggen
what is a photograph ~ # 8 • click to embiggenDuring my recent NYC visit and my Chelsea photo gallery crawl, we - Giuliano, Robert, and I - stopped into the ClampArt gallery where Marc Yankus' exhibition, The Space Between, was just finished being hung. I had very recently seen the pictures online so it was treat to see the actual prints.

Giuliano expressed an interest in how the images were created, so, Mr. Know-It-All launched into a discourse regarding his idea of how they were made. To wit, original photographs were blended in PhotoShop with a photograph or scan of some kind of textured paper. Some portion of the original photographs - primarily the buildings - were "protected" (via selection tool) from the texture which allowed the building (or part thereof) to be rendered in a more "straight" manner. In addition, the part of the original picture depicting the building's surrounding environment was manipulated to reduce the tonal range to an almost ghostly state. Or so I surmised.

My surmise was quickly validated by the comment, "That's exactly right." The comment was delivered by a person - Brian Paul Clamp? - who was hanging a small auxiliary exhibit in a very small gallery behind the main gallery. There followed some addition chat (which was mercifully artspeak free) about the pictures.

He went back to hanging prints and Giuliano and I continued discussing the work. Once again, Mr. Know-It-All Smarty-Pants expressed his opinion that Yankus was not so much a photographer as he was an artist who uses photography. Over hearing my commentary, the young woman manning the reception counter/desk (see single women # 26) gave me a sly sideways glance (accompanied by a ever-so-slight wry/humorous smile). And once again, we were joined by the person hanging the small exhibit.

He explained to us how Mr. Yankus was a fine artist who slowly evolved to using the medium of photography. Indeed, on his website Yankus is (self?)described as "a photographer and an artist who uses digital mediums to create mixed media." Notice the distinction made - photographer v. artist.

All of that written, it should be obvious that my new series what is a photograph? is very much in the tradition (and it's a very old tradition) of an artist who uses photography. I have operated within the halls of that convention before - life without the APA - so I'm not exactly treading on unfamiliar ground.

However, now I'm confused. Am I an artist or am I a photographer? Is there a difference? If so, what the hell is the difference?

The art world, especially so the fine art photography division (as it currently exists in a hijacked by the academic lunatic fringe state of affairs), has always been much concerned with the idea that, to be considered a work of art, that work must make evident both the hand and mind of its maker. No less an idea was expressed exactly so by academia as early on as 1648 with the establishment of tha Academie Royale de Peinture et de Sculpture in Paris, followed by the Royal Academy in London in 1768. And to be certain, a hand with an attached finger activating the shutter of picture making machine did not qualify as making evident the hand of the maker.

I can write from personal experience that my life without the APA work elicits much more of viewer reaction than does much of my other work based primarily on the fact of its making. Yes, viewers like and appreciate the content and meaning/message of the finished pictures, but they go absolutely all gaga regarding the manner in which the final images were constructed. Consequently, I am referred to by many who have viewed the work as a "true artist". I can also write from experience that the 2 individuals - 1 a photographer, 1 not - who have viewed my first blush attempt at making a what is a photograph? picture have both been initially wrapped up in the manner of the making of what they were seeing.

I don't mention these reactions as a criticism of those who experience them. I do so, in a very real sense, in support of the nearly universal sway that the making of an object of an artist's expression/vision exerts upon the perception of its status as art. A perception which explains why so-called "straight" photography has, and still does in many quarters, had to struggle with gaining acceptance as "real"/"true" art. And, consequently, whether or not its maker is considered to be an "artist" or merely a "photographer".

As for me, I don't care about the distinction between an artist and a photographer. That's because, quite simply, I am neither. In fact, I am a picture maker plain and simple - I just make pictures. And, please, feel free to label me and my results with any nomenclature you might choose to employ.

FYI the words on the image in the what is a photograph? # 7 are: We better stop pretending.