Is Photography Art?

In many people's mind, a photograph is a picture made by a machine. It is easy and simple to pick up a camera and press the button. So, how can photography be art?


To answer this question we first need to define art. According to New Oxford American Dictionary, art is "an expression or application of human creative skill and imagination".

By this definition, I don't think that all photographs are art. As Jo Plumridge (photographer) rightly states, only photographs "in the right circumstances" should be considered art. So what are these so-called "circumstances"? I believe that the most important of these "circumstances" is to be able to use just a snapshot to convey a strong message or story, to evoke emotion for the viewer. This is definitely no different from more visual pieces of art.

I think photography can be art because of the skill and artistic ability required to take a good photo. It is not easy to capture the right moment and the right subject matter to convey the message. For example, in the two examples below, although for the same type of event, you can see clearly how big the difference the outcome is. The photographer was unable to capture the moment is the first photo. As you can see, it is bleak, uninteresting and simply doesn't convey the right message of the happiness of a wedding. While in the second one, the photographer absolutely captures the right moment of the happiness and excitement of the wedding day. 

"It is not easy to capture the right moment"

Also, using other elements in the background of the photograph to compliment the subject to help tell the story is no easy task. Things such as angles (e.g. close-up, long shot, low-angle, high-angle), lighting and composition can really affect the outcome of the photograph.

(For more details on what are the "right circumstances", please go to "What Makes a Good Photograph?")