Photography is it art

Photography is it art 

What is the difference between Photography and art.  

In my opinion why I think that photography is art and it is good and bad Is because people sell art for millions of pounds and they get profit from it and a lot of people sell pictures to get profit as well and I think that both of the things are similar to each other for example someone takes a picture because of the effect of the picture looks like that it is a painting and a lot of people have used that illusion on famous art people and people have fell for that illusion and pictures fall for the illusions like mixtures of the grass pond and sky there are different types of pictures of them and a lot of them are illusions of art and even for the some are a lot of the art are illusion into photography the thing I like about photography art is the illusion in it and the illusion colour that is used in the picture and the background that has been changed for the painting effect to make it ok like a painting and the things that I hate about photography art is that a lot of people try and sell it for money e.g. the material, the actual paint, and they use photography and make it look like art so they can sell it and they even use art and sell it making it look like photos a lot of people have sold photos that look like art for big money for millions and billions of pounds and a lot of painters these days are not able to sell their painting because a lot of photographers have used photos as paintings so that they can be famous artists and make their art and themselves famous

The reason why I like photography art is because some photography art has a meaning to it like the Mona Lisa when you look at that picture it looks like you are looking at a real person and a lot of people have changed the appearance of the photo and vandalised it and make fun of it, it makes me really mad and angry I try to tell them it is not right to make fun of the histories best art but they still do it my favourite painting is the Mona Lisa I like how he used colour in it and it is really realistic it looks like a photo that is what I like about the photo and the few things that I don’t like about the photo is that the photo is a portrait with one person in it and I like portraits with two people in it or a family portrait. Al lot of pictures are put on books for example harry potter the book has a lot of words but after some pages there is a picture with an action part written with it you even see pictures on money on pennies you see the picture of the queen and you can even see the picture of the queen on ten pound notes even on twenty pound notes and fifty pond notes pictures are everywhere you can see pictures on billboards on walls you can see pictures on trains as well a lot of people do painting competitions these days there are pictures that look like paintings too but people still do it. RIGA these times give us many opportunities in how to capture a moment. Some decide to take pictures using modern technologies; others, however, stick with a more traditional way which includes visual art. It seems that there is still a discussion whether photography and painting can have an equal sign. Based on it, the exhibition hall Arsenals offers a journey, called “The flights of the hybrids,” with boarding possible till Sept. 18. Yet, in 1839, when the process of photography was revealed, visual art obviously meets its main competitor. Fighting for the honour to be the primary reality pointer, discussions are alive to declare what is art, and what is not.

However, this exhibition is not created to name a winner. It works as the connector. The full title of the exhibition is “The flights of the hybrids. The artist as the photographer. The middle of the 19th century till 2010,” and it pays attention to the relations between photography and painting in the mind of an artist. Visual art has played its part in the development of photography, and that will be seen at the exhibition. People depend on reality. Arguably the fight to understand which one – photography or painting – gives us a more authentic view on reality is almost unnecessary, as they both differ only in technique. But today, when taking pictures is an ordinary activity for people, while painting is left for those who can really paint, the discussion about the ‘reality pointer’ turns out to be even more pertinent. Probably back then photography was not considered to be the danger to art as it seems now, when paintings hang at exhibition halls, but photo galleries travel around the globe with the help of the Internet. What are the hybrids of today’s art? What is today’s art? Are we able to detect if photography and painting are equally important reality platforms? Are the painter and photographer artists? Finally, where is the boundary in art, which separates photography and painting? We have many ways in how to capture a moment. Not all of them make you an artist, though. Hence, the exhibition covers many fields which demonstrate beauty and fantasy, reflection of the past, mosaics and photo collages and many more. Next to the pieces of the 19th and 20th centuries, today’s Latvian artworks are lined up so visitors would have a chance to enjoy the art of Latvian masters, such as Karlis Huns, Janis Rozentals and Gustavs Klucis, together with the new generation of Latvian art – Lilija Dinere, Sandra Krastina, Miervaldis Polis and Kristine Luize Avotina.

The exhibition also showcases postcards, glass plates and even invites one to participate in a photo shoot at the photo salon created at the hall.  

              

I think that art should not be used as photography and photography as art