"A serious question though : Why don't you consider Photography art?"\n\n-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\n\n\n[QUOTE=chiller]\n\nHi Michael,\n\nNow that is a much more interesting post. :)\n\nThanks for your thoughts -\- and I mean that. I don't agree with all you\nhave written but certainly appreciate your point of view.\n\nA serious question though : Why don't you consider Photography art?\n\nSteve.[/QUOTE]\n\n\nLet me try this one more time:\n\nConsider these objects:\n\n1) A household steam iron\n\n2) Something that looks exactly like a household steam iron\n\n3) A picture (painting) of a boy in blue clothes\n\n4) A color photograph of boy in blue clothes\n\n5) A color photograph of the (painting) of the boy in blue clothes\n\nLet's start with the steam iron, shall we? If you leave it around your\nhouse, no one is going to ask 'what is that a steam iron [i]of[/i]'?\nYou're inclined to say: 'Excuse me, I don't quite understand you!', and\nyou'd be right. A steam iron is not a steam iron of something else.\nIt's self-contained.\n\nTurning to No. 2, the 'mock' steam iron, you could call it a work of\nart I suppose, but if there is no structural difference, how can we\ncall that art? Suppose an 'artist' comes to the steam iron factory one\nday and takes away a bunch of slightly off-tolerance parts that are\nrejects, and then assembles these in exactly the correct way so as to\nform a working steam iron. Is there really any difference? I'd say\nwe're straining to say so.\n\nNow, to No. 3, the painting.\n[URL]http://www.imagereproductions.com/galnsborough/Galnsborough01-blue%20boy.jpg[/URL]\n\nWhy is this 'art'? Well, in its day, it may not have been! The term\n'artist' has been corrupted today to mean someone far more significant\nthan that of the portrait painter. By those lower standards, I could\naccept that photographers are 'artists', but I must caution that I am\ntalking only from the standpoint of portraiture, and that calling\nsomeone an 'artist' was more of an insult than a compliment. Ancient\nGreek and Roman sculpture that we praise so highly was essentially a\ncommodity. What we have left today from them is mostly the cheap marble\nstuff. The good stuff was made of bronze or other metals, and most of\nit disappeared centuries ago.\n\nNow, is the color photograph of the boy in blue clothes 'art'.\nCertainly not in the modern sense, but perhaps in the ancient sense,\nand again the term 'artist' was more a term of derision than praise.\nFinally, our fifth object is but a mere copy of an artist's portrait.\n\nNow, the most important point of my little essay. The steam iron is not\na steam iron of something else, but a photograph is always a photograph\nof something else.