Re: The meaning of life and 3D photography (or "give me art or give me death!")

[P3D Gregory J. Wageman <gjw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Mike K. asks:

>        Is the only purpose of 3D photography "art"? 

>And:

>        Is the only purpose of 3D photography in a competition or 
>        during a club's open projector activity "art"?

>And if the activity isn't purely pursuit of "art", then how does this
>affect judging of images shown and how does this affect comments like
>the one quoted of Ansel Adams a few days ago (which seem to presume
>that art is the *only* reason for photography)?

I'd just like to remind the "*my* slides are Art and *yours* ain't"
factions that there are people who maintain that *nothing* purely
photographic (i.e. not manipulated or altered in some way) is "Art",
because photography is merely the mechanical recording of reality.
All the photographer did was activate the machine, involving no
interpretation or filtering through the artist's psyche, other than
the choosing of the position from which to record what's already
there.

The "rules" of composition, lighting, etc. are entirely artificial,
based on a consensus, not some absolute truth handed down by some deity,
just as the 12-tone scale we Westerners use is not the only "right"
way to make music (just ask the Chinease).  Anyone who tries to argue
"facts" about things artistic is at best misguided, since it's all entirely
abstract and cultural.

So you're both wrong.  And you're both right.  Could we move on now,
please?

	-Greg


------------------------------