This page is referenced by:

• 1 media/Joseph_Pennell.jpg 2021-02-12T18:53:34+00:00 Is Photography Among the Fine Arts? 27 By Zofia Mowle plain 2021-03-29T20:15:11+00:00

  By: Zofia Mowle
  
  Fine art is a form of visual art, intended to be appreciated entirely for its imaginative and visionary content. Photography has developed throughout the course of many years, and there has definitely been a shift in the way we appreciate it as an art form. The field of photography has expanded significantly and in today’s society anything that has artistic intent behind it, whether that be abstract, portrait or landscape photography, will be considered fine art. The discussion of whether or not photography should be considered a ‘fine art’ is a topic that has been debated for hundreds of years. There are such strong arguments for both sides, and it’s important to recognise all these factors when forming an opinion. 

  Joseph Pennell is an American illustrator and author, who spent the majority of his life studying the traditional means of architectural drawings in Europe. During his time abroad he established an international reputation for himself as someone of high regard within the fine art world. Joseph Pennell had an extreme bias and unfavourable opinion towards photography. In 1897, Pennell wrote an excerpt titled ‘Is Photography Among the Fine Arts?’ In this excerpt he provided an array of reasons as to why photography is not among the fine arts. There’s a strong bias against photography, which is supported within the text. Pennell discusses the lack of skill required with photography, as it’s “merely mechanical and [does] not require the [same level of] training that art does.”[1] To continue, Pennell argued that photography shouldn’t be considered a fine art as it’s too easy. He compared photography to a simple hobby, saying that, “photography is amusement and relaxation.”[2] Traditional painting and photography are two completely different forms of art. Therefore, it’s difficult to truly compare them when debating the topic of what makes something ‘fine art.’ Throughout the reading he continually expresses his belief that artists are more qualified and trained than photographers, and therefore are superior. He judges photographers and ridicules them, saying what a farce it is that “Titian, Velasquex and Rembrandt actually [studied].”[3]
  
  The art of photography is to capture our surroundings with a realistic approach. Unlike with paintings, cameras have the ability to see everything and capture specific moments of time, which may go unnoticed within our everyday lives. They are essentially machines that have the capability to produce a documentary fact. Similarly to how there are machines to create carpets and machines to produce shirts, the camera is a machine that was invented to generate pictures. For this reason, Pennell questions why photography is considered an art form at all. If photography is such an automated process dependent on machinery and chemicals, then why is it art? “The man who sells margarine for butter, and chalk and water for milk, does much the same, and renders himself liable to legal prosecution by doing it.”[4] It’s clear from Joseph Pennell’s excerpt that photography is not a form of ‘fine art.’ Fine art usually involves a story and is intended to have a purpose that evokes some sort of emotion from the viewer. I agree with Pennell that it’s not possible just to take a beautifully composed picture and call it fine art. In order for an image to be considered fine art it must be designed with the intention of resonating with the viewer and compel the audience to perceive the subject matter differently. 

  In contradiction to Joseph Pennell’s excerpt, Paul L. Anderson wrote a book titled ‘The Fine Art of Photography.” This book was interesting as the author went against everything previously mentioned and he discussed the array of reasons as to why photography should be considered among the fine arts. Paul L. Anderson was an American photographer and author, who wrote many books on the art of photography. Anderson considers photography a unique form of graphic art. In his book he conveys the importance of photography as an art form, and how it’s a collaborative process where “scientific knowledge and artistic feeling go hand-in-hand to the production of a fine result.”[5] He defines fine art as “any medium of expression which permits one person to convey to another an abstract idea of lofty character, to arouse in another a lofty emotion.”[6] Anderson highlights an important factor that must be established, which is to draw the line between fine art and craftsmanship. He uses Michelangelo’s David as a clear example of something that is considered fine art, whereas a typical Indian man’s tobacconist sign as something that is not. However, it’s not possible to say just where these two expressions merge. Anderson argues that, “the Indian may carry a glimmering of an abstract, and to that extent may possess some of the elements of fine art.”[7] The question of whether or not photography is among the fine arts varies significantly from person to person. Anderson believes that for photography to be considered a true art form, and not a craft, the photographer must create an image with a specific vision. The artist must use the camera as a medium for creative expression with a goal of creating something that expresses an idea, message and emotion. 

  E. Thiesson created a Daguerreotype titled Native Woman of Sofala, 1845. In my opinion, this photograph is an exquisite example of fine art. It’s a profile portrait of an African woman seated on a wooden chair. The composition is well-balanced and the figure is situated in the center of the frame. It’s a raw and organic image that provokes a multitude of emotion within the viewer. Her expression resembles something of contemplation -she appears to be deep in thought and it forces us, as the viewer, to ask questions. Her posture is slouched, she does not wear any makeup, her hair is natural and she wears a kaba skirt, which is a traditional African skirt made from kiswah. Her breasts are left uncovered, but not in a sexualised way. She’s a traditional African woman and her appearance represents her culture. One of the essential purposes of photography is communication. This image communicates heritage, it teaches us about ethnicities and cultures that differ from our own. We use photography as a form of documentation and it’s used for educational purposes. Pennell would argue that this photograph isn’t an example of fine art, as it’s simply just a woman sitting on a chair. In his reading he makes direct comparisons between photography and painting, emphasising that one is significantly more impressive than the other. What’s better, a nude photograph or a nude painting? Pennell believes that getting a model to pose naked for a photograph puts other artists like Botticelli to shame, for he “sees what he has been taught to like by reading books on painting; which he does not understand and which teaches nothing for him.”[8] Despite this, in my opinion, Thiesson’s photograph is a true example of fine art photography. It’s evident that the artist took the time to carefully create the composition, from the framing of the image to the details of the woman -her attire, posture, expression, etc. Dona Schwartz, an author and professor of journalism, wrote an article on the social construct of photography. In her article she argues that photography draws upon “ethnographic research comparing the activities of the camera club and fine art photography.”[9] This comparison translates to Thiesson’s photograph, as it’s a collaboration between ethnographic photography and fine art. 

  It’s interesting to debate the topic of what is and what isn’t considered to be ‘fine art.’ To this day, photographs remain to have less monetary value than paintings and sculpture. In my opinion, both mediums fulfil different tasks -a photographer captures a single moment, a snapshot of life, and a painter makes a picture. Paintings have the ability to illustrate deeper meanings that photographers are either unable to, or struggle to, encapsulate within their work. However, in my opinion, this doesn’t take away from what is considered ‘fine art.’ I believe that photography is among the fine arts, as fine art photography requires a similar level of precision and specific vision that other fine art mediums, such as painting and sculpture, require. Fine art photographs are created just as carefully as paintings, and therefore it’s unjust to classify photography, as a whole, as a medium that is unworthy being considered fine art.