When does photography become art?

If you take photographs, are you an artist?


Art or Photography?At what point does a photograph become a piece of art?

If you take a photograph and edit anything other than the size of the image, is it still a photograph or is it art?

Is all photography art? Purely by existing as a facsimile of the real thing, is that an artistic impression and therefore reasonably identified as art?

Photography can be defined as the art or practice of taking and processing photographs, therefore it is still a photograph no matter how much processing you carry out?

I take a photograph of a painting in the Tate Modern or Louvre. I then edit it into a different size, crop it and change the colours to monochrome from its original colours. Can I then claim it as mine and sell it as art?

Art can be defined as the expression or application of creative skill and imagination, in a visual form, a production of works to be appreciated for their beauty or emotional power.

Is the modern day photographer therefore accepted as an artist. Is their skill now in using software rather than their camera and lighting to produce the perfect shot?

I’d love to have your feedback on  this…

If you take photographs, are you an artist?

If you make art, of any type, would you be happy for someone else to photograph it, edit and retouch the image and claim it as a photograph?


Author: christieadamswriter.com

I’m a storyteller focused on sharing my love of literature, travel, photography and all things arty.
My blogging supports my writing and I’m committed to encouraging others to pursue their dreams through travel and the arts.

4 thoughts on “When does photography become art?”

    1. Thank you! I agree, the power of art is often underestimated. Photographers can do reportage, I guess art is their product too. Enjoy your day, and thank you for taking the time to comment it is appreciated and makes all my work worthwhile.

  1. There is some degree of difference between art and photography and I think that photography can be very much an art.

    Just like a painter may frame their image of a particular landscape or subject, a photographer, will choose their angle and subject. However, a photographer specifically captures an image of a fixed point in time. While they can alter and manipulate the image (which actually extends their influence on the art form even more), they are capturing their unique point of view. Just as a painter might paint a scene from their own point of view.

    I guess the same question could be asked between for example a painter, who paints a scene using a combination of brushes and paints and someone who uses photoshop and a series of tools and brushes within the application to create an image. Both use their creative ability to create a final result.

    1. Good point. I love both media. I feel guilty if I tamper too much with a photograph, it feels like I’m not using my photographic skills, eye for a good picture, artistic view etc but turning it into a science.
      I think that is why I love the old school Hollywood photography pre-photoshop. I saw an amazing shot taken in that era, where lead make up facial scarring was unseen purely due to great lighting. They say Marilyn (and bizarrely Madonna) have quite hairy faces so they look awesome in shots with the right light reflections.
      Thank you for your feedback, I’m glad you gave me your views. Have a great day.

Comments are closed.