Rendering №2

The headline of the article is The impact of photography on art. The article was created on May 12, 2008 and last updated on May 02, 2012. The author of the article is Shelly Mcrae. The author gives the readers a description of the impact of photography on art of painting by means of comparing both of them.

The writer states that the painters of the mid 19th century worried the camera would deprive them of an important revenue stream, portrait painting. Therefore, they added to their portraits expressionism, an element the camera as yet could not capture.

The author explains that the artist relied on sketches and skill to complete the project. It was this that allowed the artist to bring something a bit more abstract to the work. However, the camera required its subject to choose a position and hold very still for some minutes, to maintain his or her expression and stance. And the background was a permanent fixture to the final product.

The writer clarifies that artists could embellish, could create new backgrounds that would reflect the interests or status of their subjects. While, the camera could not embellish; it could only record. Yet, the camera became more than a mere recording device. Photography has become an art form in itself, thus giving artists a new medium to explore.

Further the author reports that photography, in a direct impact, compelled the painter to bring to his work the unseen life of the subject of a portrait. It may be argued that DaVinci may have had this in mind when he painted the enigmatic smile of the Mona Lisa.

Photography, though, continued to grow beyond the portrait. It could be said that landscape artists would be threatened by the likes of Ansel Adams, were not for the fact that photographers took their medium in an entirely other direction.

The author states that to capture realism is the utilitarian use of the camera, as evidenced by the countless snapshots clinging to the pages of photo albums in homes around the world. But when photography becomes art, the realism of the work is rarely central to the theme. When looking at the works of pioneering photographer such as Adams and Cunningham, viewers see sharpened contracts and juxtapositions of those things that are real; the photographs, though, put them in a new perspective.

In the author’s opinion, this adjusted realism can be far more difficult to capture on canvas. A painter who wishes to create a photographic effect must labor to hide the true nature of his medium. Photographers arrange and capture. Photographers manipulate with chemicals, or now with computers. The realism exists before the medium. Painters must create realism.

The author comes to the conclusion that the impact photography has had on art has been one of division and controversy. Some people see photography as a lesser art, others consider photography as a positive force, galvanizing the artist to try new things, new mediums, to create new realities, both from within and without.

To my mind, this article is really worth reading. Having read about such an Art How as photography, especially about its impact on the art of painting, I have learned many new things for myself about the subtleties of artistry.