[mobertol]

Originally Posted by Studio25

I think that even with a lot of forethought, photography is not necessarily art. I consider a small proportion of my work to be artistic, but not actual art.

In my opinion, for a photo to be art, it needs to be planned in advance with some sort of pre or post processing in mind - whether using filters, dark room techniques or photoshop. But even then, that doesn't necessarily make it art. On my wall, I've got a firework display done in Whitby. It passes all my criteria for "art" - it was planned in advance, took time to get right, was always going to be photoshopped. If it is art, it's not good art.

I am of the opposite opinion -the best photos are often the most unplanned, capturing a fleeting expression on a face for example -art has to have some sponteneity to transmit emotions. Set up and planned is often staged and unfeeling. My best photographs of my god-daughter, and I have taken a lot over the years as she is a lovely model, are the ones I take when she doesn't know and her expression is natural and not posed.