>>2683996LOL
You have no grasp on what it means to create art if you think that an artistic photo is a pedestrian shot at perfect exposure of a fucking sunset.
> ordinary guy with an iPhone can take a shot of that place and it can be called a good photo. That is why photography can't be a true art in a senseThis is where you armchair critic elitist faggots show your true unoriginal colours. The fact that you can equate taking a technically good photo as the closest that a photographer can get to doing something artistic really shows how far youve been pushed into the box.
The artistic aspect of photography isn't in capturing a pretty image of an object. Its in capturing a feeling, a mood or a sense of time and place that goes far beyond what is seen within the frame. A good photograph is good becauses it captures a unique sense of what it was like to be there, or an insight into the human condition.
This is what separates photographic artists and plebs pointing a camera at shit.
For example lets look at some great photographers. Il just throw out Bresson, Koudelka and Klein for arguments sake. If you look at their work you see a technical brilliance, but you also see an unmistakable talent for conveying an idea or mood that completely transcends the image in front of you. The artistic element is their eye, and this eye is really the differential between "stamp collector" and artist.
If you go and get yourself educated on some actual great photographic artists you might not be so ignorant as to believe that anyone can produce a 'great' photo. Or maybe you dont understand what a great photo really is.
Either way you need to get educated before spewing this bullshit on the impressionable minds of the average young /p/leb.That or evolve past taking photos of flowers and your cat.
