In the art world there are always going to be those that seem to disparage photography by implying it is not art. Some of those would instead label it more as a technology to capture imagery. Case in point is an article that recently posted to the Guardian in which Jonathan Jones an art critic made the statement that a photograph which sold for 6.5 million was merely like a “posh poster you might find framed in a pretentious hotel room”. His premise stems from a reaction to a previous article he wrote in which he implied that photography does not belong in galleries. To be fair he does not exactly state that photography is not something to be appreciated, but he definately does not appear as if he holds if to the same esteem. His implication is that photography is lifeless and flat as an art form. While I don’t agree with his premise, after speaking with photographers over the years I believe he is not alone in his sentiment. Professional critics rarely set the standard in my book, but I suspect the mainstream art market tends to lean in his direction. I base this from talking with photographers who tell me it seems to be challenging to locate galleries willing to carry their work even when they know from their successes that their work does sell. I tell them, its not easy for traditional artists either. Far be it for me to not encourage any photographer working toward entering into the art market but be prepared to knock on the doors of a few more galleries until you find those that do see photography as art.
Read More...