>>4434044>Can you claim that an accidental aspect of a photograph is artistic?Anything we humans do or in the current of the nature can be artistic not just with in the scope of photography. Even if there is no actor or subject that willed to make it artistic. The photo can come around to containe artistic sense.
And all photographie is not art. and it shouldn't be.
It can convey artistic senses but not be an art.
In fact, determining the photographie as an art is disrespecting it's fundamentals. If you treat it as an art form it becomes not photographie anymore.
Then, what is the fundamentals of photography?
Capturing the fraction of time you experienced which cannot be replicated.
No painters no hyper-realism artist can't do this shit.
Because painters realize their image from their imagination and memory at the best to get close
to the photography's inherit objectivity. Among human's tools and ways of representation only photography can literally, captures the reality even before you memorizing or perceiving it (which is quite related to your question "Accidents in photograpie").
