That depends in this case on how you define photography, is it an art or
a craft, in photography you are taking something that's already there
and recording it. The photographer applies his skills in camera and in
processing to make it better in some way. If he's (English makes this
the non gender soporific pronoun live with it), good at it has a good
eye and decent skills, the recording can be raised to the level of art.
A machine can follow the same rules, so it could be machine art, but a
machine will never break the rules.
On 10/24/2018 3:01 PM, John wrote:
But is it really "machine art"? Or is it "Art" made by people using
machines?
Ultimately the tool you choose doesn't matter as much as your skill
using those tools and how well you you are able to show others what
you've "seen" with your mind's eye.
If you can communicate your vision, then it's the appropriate tool.
On 10/23/2018 10:33, P. J. Alling wrote:
There's really only so much you can do with code, before you're no
longer recording a scene, and are actually generating it, which is
art not photography. Personally I prefer my art to be produced by
humans not by machines mainly because machine art is kinda dull.
On 10/23/2018 10:10 AM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote:
https://techcrunch.com/2018/10/22/the-future-of-photography-is-code/
Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola
--
America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
- P.J. O'Rourke
--
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.
