Turns out I am a ‘Fine Art’ photographer…

Woods for the Trees

I have always wondered what a ‘Fine Art’ photographer is? So I was quite surprised to read the other day, I am one…

Turns out that what I have been doing for years, is exactly the definition of a fine art photographer, and by all accounts most the people I admire are too. I am not sure if the term ‘fine art’ is actually what I want to be called though, to me, it sounds, well a little pretentious? And this is coming from someone who has maybe a bit of pretentiousness in me.

First of all, what is fine art photography? Well the 1st few lines on the subject on Wikipedia answer that…

Fine art photography is photography created in accordance with the vision of the artist as photographer. Fine art photography stands in contrast to representational photography, such as photojournalism, which provides a documentary visual account of specific subjects and events, literally re-presenting objective reality rather than the subjective intent of the photographer; and commercial photography, the primary focus of which is to advertise products or services. ~ Wikipedia

And the above statement is exactly what I do, when I see a scene, I see it as the finished image, no matter what the start point is. I know there will always be some editing in Lightroom, and Photoshop, I will use filters when taking the image, I will manipulate what I want out of the whole journey of each image. I do this for my pleasure, and if I am lucky other people will like it too.

Below are some examples of such a thing, this is what I like to call my Woodland Series, and it involves a lot of different edits and styles, however the result is how I see it (roughly) when I first take the image.

But am I ready to call myself a ‘Fine Art’ photographer? Time will tell…

Leave a Reply, got a question?

%d bloggers like this: