On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Bob W <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Basically. But with an artistic look >> (painting/pastel/charcoal/stencil) >> > rather than photographic or illustration look. >> >> Oh dear. >> >> I don't want to go down that road... >> >> ;-) >> >> cheers, >> frank >> > > Go on, Frank! It's one small step for a man...
It seems to me that Marnie may be confusing media with product - or at least she's confusing ~me~. Photography, paint, charcoal and stencils are merely media that may or may not produce art. Taking photography and doing something with it that makes it look like another media doesn't make the original photograph any less "art". Nor does effecting those changes necessarily make the new thing "more arty" than the original. Different, yes. More "arty"? Not necessarily. OTOH, since the faux change in media is certainly part of Marnie's expression, the change is art, so perhaps her term "to artify" is okay. I guess what bothers me is the implication that the original product is not art, or that it's "less" art than the finished product. Or maybe I'm just being too picky. That's all. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
