Creation and Destruction

July 22, 2012 § 18 Comments

Someone told me today that it is a one thing to retouch or make a photo look better and another to destroy a photo, using photoshop and other programs like it.

For me there is no destruction in any point, from the moment a photo is placed “under construction” there is only creation. Some may like the result while others will not.

Also some corrections on a photo is totally different thing, from taking a photo manipulating it in such way that you “bend” or alter reality and create something new. In a way is not a photograph any more, but in anyway it is not destruction.

Tagged: , , , , , ,

§ 18 Responses to Creation and Destruction

  • Sean Jeating says:

    Dropping by, after all, via Ashley (Syncopated Eyeball), despite being a very lazy commenter, I think at least I ought to leave a short com(pli)ment:.

    I agree to what has been written above, as long as we are ‘talking’ about art.
    When it comes to journalism, manipulation of photos is a ‘no go’!; well, at least it should be.

    Good luck with your work.

  • Adrian Lewis says:

    I agree with you 101%, arkturosx, there is no destruction, there is only creation. I have no time for purest or puritanical thoughts like “destruction” – if we change a photo to suit our tastes, or if we “bend” it so that it no longer represents reality, that is all creation. There is no great value in the purist line that photos must always represent reality. Adrian

  • I agree with you, Arkturosx. For me the end product is what counts. I care not how it came into being.

  • A Walk In The Dark says:

    A. this is a very interesting thought .As we reach for the techno toys to create with, we ask ourselves is this still art? well then we could also talk about subjectivism versus objectivism in art as well. But I believe art begins with the thought , inspiration and so when photographers create through photoshop etc. to montage or Chine Colle and effect. they are still creating a vision particular to that thought . When I modeled nothing was manipulated but the light and a pencil…so things were very pure …no digital. It is the true medium to create something that is pioneering and you have done that..xoxoxox

    • arkturosx says:

      Indeed there is a question and no there is no point entering in a conversation about subjectivism and objectivism (although is very interesting 😛 ).

      For me the question is, what is art?

      If I could give an answer I believe it would be something like … Art is a creative idea a result of the collision of matter with spirit, expressed in any way using any media, from a person (or a team) to the world.

      For photography not everyone carrying around a camera is an artist, but sadly today if you carry a film camera you’re considered an artist by many people.

      • A Walk In The Dark says:

        A..I agree.. but I disagree about the film there is plenty of bad film out there AND bad art as well.. the difference is to KNOW the difference to have the eyes…LOL!
        and now we come to the original conversation I brought and this my friend is like talking about religion to some…art is a church for the artists ..Picasso (ok he was a bit off his cracker) but! Picasso said his studio was like a temple and once he steeped in he was on his knees to his art. Oh and not so that everyone who has a camera is a photographer! I have proof of many years as a model..ahhahhahhaa!

        • arkturosx says:

          Of course there is a lot of bad art made with film. First of all i see many images looking just voyeur, recording your life in film is not art. It s true art for some people can reach the point of religion.

          • A Walk In The Dark says:

            Totally!! take Andrei Tarkovsky and Fritz Lang! now that is art! not to mention how your photos are so like ATs film…I have told you this ..look up I think “Mirror”? by him….He was a poet with a lens. He also took incredible photos too.

          • arkturosx says:

            Yes true. The sad think is that i still wait for AT movies.

  • drawandshoot says:

    You are a maker of art ,Arkturo. An artist has freedom with their medium, they are creators!

  • i fully agree … The end result is what counts. The creator can do as he/she likes. Others do not need to like that.

  • oneowner says:

    Every photograph, to some degree, is manipulated. There is always distortion or noise of even composition and point-of-view that alters reality. It’s the very nature of photography.

    • arkturosx says:

      I think that most photos out there represent realism, yes from “inside the eyes of the photographer”, but realism. It is true to some degree all photos are.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Creation and Destruction at Slice of Life.


%d bloggers like this: