While the use of lightmeters and computerized image processing can lead to more technically \"correct\" images, fine art is often as much about the process as about the result.
If one were to only look at the finished pictures, one could easily say that the composition was flawed, the exposure was off, etc.; but if one knew that the image was made in a mobile camera obscura by an artist who used only his intuition and experience for exposure control, one couldn\'t help, in my opinion, but to be moved by the experience.
His work gives testimony to the length some artists will go to for their craft,
and he is a testament to the fact that in the best of cases,
an artist is his art.
While the use of lightmeters and computerized image processing can lead to more technically \"correct\" images, fine art is often as much about the process as about the result.
If one were to only look at the finished pictures, one could easily say that the composition was flawed, the exposure was off, etc.; but if one knew that the image was made in a mobile camera obscura by an artist who used only his intuition and experience for exposure control, one couldn\'t help, in my opinion, but to be moved by the experience.
His work gives testimony to the length some artists will go to for their craft,
and he is a testament to the fact that in the best of cases,
an artist is his art.
Oct 01, 2008 at 02:16 AM
Previous versions of BrianO's message #6226619 « Canon just lost the war to... »
