20% off all products!   Sale ends tonight at midnight EST.

Return to Main Discussion Page
Discussion Quote Icon

Discussion

Main Menu | Search Discussions

Search Discussions
 
 

Lori Frostad

9 Years Ago

What Are Your Thoughts? Is My Art Cheating?

I once had an acquaintance of mine suggest that my art was ‘cheating’.

I guess he figured that because my photo art looked like a painting but wasn’t…it was cheating.

At the time, I didn’t say anything because I didn’t realize what he had actually said or was actually saying.

When I did, I thought it was a bit unfair.

And here are several reasons why:
1. I never once tried to pass my art off as paintings. The name of my company at the time had ‘Photo Creations’ in the title;
2. Everyone I speak to about my art are informed that they are photos manipulated with software;
3. I trudge, travel, arrange, set up, etc. for all the pictures I have. They were taken by me (Disclaimer: There is a remote possibility that one of my children may or may not take one or two pictures in the future);
4. I spend hour(s) on my ‘creations’, getting them to where they feel right to me.
5. Etc.

If I’m cheating, he must also be cheating when he types a letter on a typewriter or a computer. Or perhaps, he is cheating the moment he doesn’t use a quill and a bottle of ink to write his letter. He must also be cheating when he uses a remote control to change the channel on his TV rather than get up and do it by hand (OK, that is a bit of s stretch, but making this point is helping me to vent).

As we all know, modern technology is constantly evolving. Digital cameras are slowing replacing film cameras (maybe never completely, but I’m sure coming close). Painting with oils, etc. may eventually become rare just like the ink well (but I hope not. I have dabbled (so to speak) with oil/acrylic and love it. I love the texture it brings to the canvas, so I truly hope that never happens, but I am simply making a point).

As much as I’m sure he thinks the software does all the work and that there is nothing left for me to do, he is wrong. Most creations take several well placed settings to make them a complete & spectacular image (in my opinion anyway). I’m not going to say that there isn’t a one click program that might work with a particular image, but it is very rare.

I also wanted to add; it seems to me that SOME people are reluctant to accept this type of photo art as authentic art (my apologies, if I have insulted anyone). I too struggle with some forms of (what may be considered) ‘mainstream’ art. I’ll give you an example, I am struggling as to how remix music is considered art. The DJ that does the remix is not the person(s) that created the original music and yet he is given kudos and treated like a celebrity and called an artist. At the very least, I am actually taking the picture that I ‘remix’. Knowing that, can I now be called an artist?

Of course, painters/sculptors/etc. are known as artists, even painters/sculptors that create abstract pieces of art. I know a lot of people that don’t get that either. HOWEVER, I get abstract art (as long as you put a title on it. Untitled pieces of abstract art give me the impression that they were made with no purpose or thought and I am a bit suspicious of that. However, having said that, it doesn’t mean I can’t appreciate and admire the work that the artist has created).

There are many beautiful singers in the world, but I sometimes find it funny that a singer is called an artist and yet many struggle to call a photographer an artist. (Don’t get me wrong, I can see why singers are called artists, I just can’t see why photographers don’t get the same courtesy, without some type of argument). I’ve always thought that was a bit weird. However, maybe it’s a struggle because for years, photographers were somewhat known for capturing facts in history and as a result, very few people take the time to admire the artistry involved in making that image. Just a thought.

I hope I didn’t offend anyone with by statements (aka ‘venting’), but I thought through conversation we could see that photographers or people that like to take photos and manipulate them into a pleasing/thought provoking image could be considered artist as well and that our images/creations have value.

So, the next time I see him, I will ask him…how exactly am I cheating?

Thanks for your time, and If you’re curious, the image I am referring to is my creation called “Lonesome Pier”.

What are your thoughts?

Lori Frostad

Reply Order

Post Reply
 

Tony Murray

9 Years Ago

All art is "cheating". Next time you hear it say "Thanks". None of us created anything, we only use what's been given to us or what we take. If we re-imagine things in a clever way then we are called artists.

 

Phyllis Beiser

9 Years Ago

I looked at a few of your works and you are very specific in the description that they are digital enhanced photos. I do not see how this could be considered cheating, that is very honest. Now if you were calling them paintings, that would be a whole different ball game!
As far as a photographer being an artist, that has been a long debate here and rehashed over and over with heated arguments. My own opinion is that yes, some photographers are artist, some just photographers and on the same note, some artist (painters) are artists, some are just dreamers. Just my two cents!

 

Marlene Burns

9 Years Ago

The next time you see him, you should just hand him a copy of this OP.
AND, then, most importantly, know that one person's opinion is nothing more than that...just one person's opinion.

 

Donna Proctor

9 Years Ago

Lori -

Many including myself will consider it "cheating" if you are intentionally misrepresenting photography as traditional painting.

You said:

1. I never once tried to pass my art off as paintings. The name of my company at the time had ‘Photo Creations’ in the title;
2. Everyone I speak to about my art are informed that they are photos manipulated with software; . . .


How you categorize your artwork after you upload will determine what you intend for viewers to believe . . . according to what you wrote for numbers 1 $ 2 above, it seems to me you are being honest about your work. If you are being honest about your work, it won't matter what anyone else thinks or says ;)

--Donna Proctor

 

JC Findley

9 Years Ago

Nope, you are not.

Art is NOT photo journalism.

 

Patricia Strand

9 Years Ago

I agree with the above posts. Your "acquaintance" is only one ignorant person -- why give him so much credence? Please, just continue with your work and don't try to justify it so much. As Phyllis said, your descriptions are correct, and you are not deceiving anyone. Artists come in all forms, not just as painters.

 

Janine Riley

9 Years Ago

Art is merely an optical illusion. It is a representation of what was seen, and or felt.
Neither a photograph, painting or sculpture of a mountain - is the actual mountain.


 

Roy Erickson

9 Years Ago

Cheating - so did Ansel Adams "cheat" - he did it in a dark room - manipulating the camera shots he took. It perhaps only proves the person knows little about how "art" is created. Take a look at these images from Google about the Camera Obscura, "cheating" comments will make you laugh : https://www.google.com/search?q=camera+obscura+history&client=firefox&hs=XkD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&channel=sb&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=mlhRU8aLLcjIsASNwIAw&ved=0CDsQsAQ&biw=1104&bih=610

 

Donna Proctor

9 Years Ago

. . .Artists come in all forms, not just as painters.

Eggsactly! :)

 

Melissa Bittinger

9 Years Ago

Not cheating, it's creating something new from your photos and it's your art. Also, you explain that it's enhanced photography. You have some great stuff Lori!

Because of two other threads started recently, one by me on the term "artography" as a category name and another thread that was in response to mine about "straight photgraphy/pictorialism" - but was also about what to call photo manipulations or enhanced photography...I would be curious if you would like to see a separate category descriptive name, different from digital art (which I see is how you are categorizing your images), or if you are satisfied with the term digital art?

 

J Morgan Massey

9 Years Ago

The art is the same...the tools have just evolved.

 

Lori Frostad

9 Years Ago

THANKS everyone.

Tony, Janine - Your comments are very cleaver, profound…and very true!

Phyllis, Donna, JC, Patricia, RoyD, - Well said!

Marlene - Well said & ya, I just might give him a copy and then see what he has to say.


 

Sheena Pike

9 Years Ago

Lori ....ignorance is a dangerous weapon. Tune it out and carry on. Do not second guess yourself, do not give it power. Ignorance can be fear, it can be jealousy or it can be just plain ol lack of understanding. Either way you hold the key to your art, your identity. If I second guessed myself and my work every time I was told I was wrong, I wasn't a true artist ....I' wouldn't be an artist. It's part of the gig, take it and use it as motivation.

 

Bj Lewis

9 Years Ago

As a photographer I agree that my photos are art because they were created by how I saw the subject. And as you say, we take the time to plan, set up, light, expose, process, and digitally enhance our photos. But even Fine Art America makes a distinction between artists and photographers. I'm reminded of this every time I log in and click the "Artists / Photographers" link.

 

Lori Frostad

9 Years Ago

THANKS Melissa! That is very sweet of you to make such a lovely comment!

I know … I have struggled with the category title as well. I recently changed my category (for any new future images) to Photography - Digitally Enhanced. Because when I look at what most people have listed as 'digital art' it appears that the image totally originated on the computer. And of course my thoughts are…my 'creations' are digital but there origin is a photograph. And of course, they are more than just a photograph. If I enter a contest that states 'photography', I usually either enter my one image that has minimal post processing or I don't enter...as a usual routine…unless of course, it states that post processing is accepted. I think a lot of us are confused.

I would like to see a more & separate descriptive name for the photographs that are 'greatly' enhanced (not just a little enhanced). Artography isn't bad. Photocreations isn't bad. Maybe we need to have a vote?

 

Lori Frostad

9 Years Ago

Well said J Morgan Massey, Sheena, BJ!

J Morgan - I am always thankful for innovation.

Sheena - It is interesting how negative influence can sometimes make the best motivation.

BJ - That was great that you mentioned the view of FAA. That was something I was always going to comment about too (but didn't…until now…lol)


 

John Crothers

9 Years Ago

All I needed to read was this...

"3. I trudge, travel, arrange, set up, etc. for all the pictures I have. They were taken by me "

From that point on whatever you do is NOT cheating. If you were taking images from other sources (like the internet) then I would have thought differently.

 

Chelsea Perez

9 Years Ago

I had the same thing happen to me, and I fought with myself about it for a month, angry with myself that maybe it was true. but I talked with a fellow artist, and she said, what you do is 100% more then what the paid artist in NY does, I paint the pictures, I change them completely, and I make sure they are not anyone else's art before hand. If anything I use base models if I cant get the form correct. everything else is my ideas, my work. so I got over it, and told myself, hell... if anyone can make it look damn good, with their own name on it, and not erasing someone elses, then my stuff is just fine.

 

Yo Pedro

9 Years Ago

Generally speaking, people who make such comments are not as well informed as they may think, and may be expressing a little bit of arrogance. I've heard this sort of remarks for years, even from very close friends. There are endless parallels throughout history, from the automobile to the electric guitar, and so on.

Never defend your work to anyone.

You do what you do, and you do so to satisfy yourself. The most you can hope for is that others may appreciate what you have created and acknowledge your accomplishments, hopefully in the form of cash!

 

Mike Savad

9 Years Ago

it's only cheating if you call them paintings. i've seen some here, clearly use a painter program and they go on and on about how they painted it by hand. most if not all my work look like paintings, as designed. i don't know what cheating really is in these terms. your next question to him would be: so are you going to buy one or not?

---Mike Savad

 

Raffi Jacobian

9 Years Ago

Would you also consider painting from nature or doing a portrait cheating? You are after all copying something. Any and all methods are acceptable so long as they produce a satisfactory result. It's also possible to overthink or overimagine a thing to death. Just do it and let it go. Sometimes it works other times it doesn't. Thats life.

 

Karen Joslin

9 Years Ago

I agree, your work is not cheating. And as noted by Roy, film photographers also manipulate images. One of my favorite photographers is Jerry Uelsmann, who was creating surreal composites with film back in the 1960s. (Maybe earlier.) And then there's his wife, Maggie Taylor, who is an amazing artist in her own right. I personally would consider her a mixed media artist, but I always see her referred to as a photographer. She combines scans of old Victorian photos with scans of three-dimensional objects, backgrounds she paints, and occasionally photographs she has taken. (For instance, if she needs arms in a particular position to replace the arms on a photo of a little girl, she'll photograph the arms herself.)

There are also a lot of portrait photographers out there using Corel Painter or the paint tools in Photoshop to create portrait "paintings." As far as I can tell, they're not misleading their clients about how these are created, and clients seem to love them. I doubt that most of the people buying them really care how they were created, as long as they like the end result.

Post-processing is just as necessary in digital photography as it was with film (after all, that's what developing film and making a print actually is). There seems to be a segment of photographers (and I guess other people) who believe that photography should be as "realistic" as possible. That's to be expected if you're a photojournalist. But if you're an artist, you need to follow your own vision. No matter what you do, there will always be people who don't like it or don't get it. So why try to please those people? Create work that speaks to you, and spend your time and energy working to attract the people who do get it and who do love what you do.

BTW, I like your photo. Of course, I have also been castigated (by complete strangers) for some of my work not being "realistic" enough. :)

 

Brian Wallace

9 Years Ago

How come you never hear an accusation that someone is cheating because their painting looks too much like a photograph. We've all seen them and I can't help but wonder if tools like rulers were used or a projection of a photo was traced. Personally, I don't much care as long as it's original.

 

FirstName LastName

9 Years Ago

There are very, very few natural shots in the world of photography anymore. Snapshots are fine for what they are, printed right out of the camera, but most fine art photography (displayed for sale) is enhanced and edited to varying levels outside the camera. For me, the camera is no more or less than a source for my imagery. Some photos I leave pretty much as shot, some I enhance with saturation and sharpness and some I completely disassemble to create new images with bits and pieces of my other photos. When my kids ask me how I created a certain shot, I wink and tell them, "Photoshop is my friend". I've pretty much decided not to discuss post processing with potential clients interested in my shots. I've seen their disappointment when I explained how I arrived at the beautiful image they've so admired.

Keep on doing what you do best! -Mark

 

Sheena Pike

9 Years Ago

Brian I actually have had that often with my drawings.......now not so much since I have tweaked my style to be a little more illustrative but when I was drawing full on realism people questioned whether I was a phony or the real deal. I now frequently share progress shots and video clips.....more so because my followers asked that I share the process. But I do get what you are saying. I'm sure photographers often run into what Lori has outlined in her thread. The best thing is to hold her head high, she doesn't have to explain herself.

 

My Motto...stands up in all situations, some here have encountered it

IGNORE THE IGNORANT



You only answer to yourself !

 

Lori Frostad

9 Years Ago

THANKS:

John - True & wise words.

Chelsea - Thanks for sharing your story. I hope you continue to believe in yourself (as I will as well).

Yo Pedro - You said it beautifully. I do do what I do (that's a lot of do do….lol…couldn't resist) because I love it. And you are right…I shouldn't and don't have to defend my style of art to anyone. If the eye of the beholder wishes not to see my creations as art…that is their right and will not stop me from creating. P.S. I love the cash comment (From your lips to God's ears).

Mike - Once again, true & wise words. I think I will take your advice and ask him that question the next time I see him…lol.

Raffi - Well said. I can tell you are a no nonsense kind of guy. :)

Karen - Your words are beautiful and very true. An artist does need to follow their own vision…because that is the whole point of why we do what we do. I'm sure this is the same for you…I feel compelled to do what I do in the style that I do it. Unfortunately, I think sometimes the curse of an artist is wanting the approval of others…however, I think I/we need to get over that and just keep on keeping on to what we feel is right. :D [However, having said that….I truly appreciate you saying that you like my photo…THANKS for that!]

Brian - ha ha ha…ya, how come painters don't get a hard time? lol. I agree, a person should not take credit for something they did not create.

Mark - Very wise words. As you know, I too have a friendship with Photoshop, Lightroom, etc. and I love them to pieces. I find people look at me funny (aka disappointed) when I tell them what I do (photo art) and also tell them that I don't do family portraits, etc. They seem to think it is odd that I do one but not the other. (For the record: I used to take photos of family & friends (free of charge of course)…but I found that it took away from my true calling of photo art. My art is what truly makes my soul sing.


THANKS again to everyone! I was feeling a bit down about the 'cheating' statement (even though I hadn't mentioned that earlier)…but I can say now, with all of your wonderfully profound, witty, kind comments that I will continue to forge ahead and continue to create what I (and many others) call art. [I think part of the reason I felt bad about what was said was because I didn't realize at the time what he had said and because of that I didn't get the chance to discuss it with him at that moment. Instead, I let it eat away at me. I will make sure to chat with him the next time I see him and properly get it off my chest].

 

Nina Fosdick

9 Years Ago

Recently someone questioned..not my clearly or even somewhat manipulated work, but an unaltered cutesy shot of some store bought décor posed on a bench. They questioned if it was art to take a photograph of someone elses creation ( although they gave it a F/L because it was cute..lol). I actually responded twice ..the first time I asked if it wasn't the same as shooting a building or a statue..or for that matter anything as I wasn't the Creator God ( I said it nicely but I was a bit miffed...although I never considered my bench décor shot to be "art" anyway..just cute) So then I decided to look at her work to actually leave a nice comment, F/L on one ..she had nada, nothing, ziltch..lol So then I REALLY wondered and looked at her favorites list...there was a shot a friend of mine took of a clock tower that I knew my friend hadn't built..LOL. So then I responded again...commented on her lack of images and just what type artist was she? Later that day ..it was still gnawing a bit at me..so I deleted my replies AND her comment.. I felt SO much better. So I'm in agreement with Vivian. Ignore them :)

 

C Husted

9 Years Ago

“The DJ that does the remix is not the person(s) that created the original music and yet he is given kudos and treated like a celebrity and called an artist.” — Having been an internet DJ, I can say from experience that mixing the vibrations, lyrics, choosing which song to follow another with, takes a bit of knowledge about music, the rhythm, the melodies. Just as some painters would advise against sloshing a can of black on a very detailed, and well-painted scene, some DJs would advise against following a song like Norah Jones' ‘Don't Know Why’ with Gavin Rossdale's ‘Adrenaline’. To those who enjoy both songs, it wouldn't seem out of the ordinary; to those who know their music, the genres tend to clash. Take it a step deeper, and you have DJs who mix their own music, whether it's all electronically engineered or physically played, and add that to the mixture of original songs they play, or leave it as a standalone. It's all about learning the details behind the ‘How’ and the ‘Why’ to find common ground, and when to mix and when not to mix, just like many other forms of artistry. – Another example that you may understand better, as a photographer, is why you wouldn't necessarily want to include a photo you took of the New York Skyline in an album filled with nature photographs. (No offense taken; simply trying to explain the concepts.)

Art is, as is beauty, found and interpreted by each individual, as that individual chooses to interpret.

The main reason that artists take up artistry, is to show the world to others through their eyes, how they would like to see it, or maybe, to show others how they interpret the world around them; perhaps, in some cases, all of the above and more. As long as you keep your work honest, keywords/tags, and descriptions honest, then I see no point in placing blame and calling names. Art is what the creator of the piece thinks of the creation, and less what others think of it. Art On.

 

Mark Andrew Thomas

9 Years Ago

Lori,

I will echo was most people have already said, as long as you're not representing them as paintings and being honest about them, it is NOT cheating. It is your vision which is unique to you and you only. Sometimes more work goes into this kind of photography than simply taking a picture, doing basic editing, and uploading it. Granted, it helps if you have a good image to start with but that is a given. Some of my photos (especially the wildlife) are not as edited. That is one creative outlet, the photographer in me if you will. Landscape photos are where I bring my vision into the picture. With landscape photos I have clear vision of what I want and the camera can only go so far, editing software picks up where the camera leaves off. I wasn't blessed with the ability to draw or paint so that is my creative outlet, that is the artist in me. Even singers need help, I used to do sound work and many (if not most these days) performers need reverb and other tricks to enhance their live voice. Is that cheating? As long as their not miming it, I say no. Art is subjective and there will always be debate but as long as you're truthful to others (and yourself) I wouldn't worry about it.

 

Billy East

9 Years Ago

I'm amazed by so many people thinking a painted photograph is something new?

 

Bishopston Fine Art

9 Years Ago

Some paintings look like photos, and some photos look like paintings. In any case, everything on here is a photo, unless you're selling an original. If the customer wants the image for whatever reason, the medium is irrelevant.

 

Dyan Johnson

9 Years Ago

Don't use the word "manipulated"!!!! (it is a forceful word) "Digitally Enhanced" is a much friendlier and more creative description for a potential buyer to hear.

 

CAROLYN SLATTERY

9 Years Ago

I find that when someone says something like this to me and it "sticks", meaning it really bothers me, it's because there is some internal voice of my own that is critical. Once you come to terms with that voice, and have total confidence and faith in your own work you will find those people singing a different tune. As a digital artist I struggle with this all the time. The ephemeral quality to digital art lacks a tangible presence that many feel must be present(including myself at times). It is the same with photography. Old ideas die hard! within and without.

 

Lori Frostad

9 Years Ago

Thanks…

Nina - Ya, it's funny what some people think the comment on. Sometimes it's good to vent…as long as you're able to find peace at the end. Although, having said that….ultimately, it's best to find peace from the start, and as you and others have said…just ignore them. ;)

C - I hope I didn't offend you with my DJ comment. Once again, I remind myself there are more to things than meet the eye. Unfortunately, until now I never realized there was such artistry in being a DJ, but I now know better. Art on to you too!

Mark - Very wise words. You are right…art is very subjective and I am creating what feels right to me and have decided (awhile ago) not to let anybody's comments change the way I want to create because it does feel so right to me.

Billy - lol…it's fairly new to me. I've only been creating my creations since 2010. And maybe over the years…images I have been admiring as paintings where/are actually digitally created. Some are hard to differentiate (that relates back to Mike's comment).

John - Ha, ha ha…ultimately, you are right about that.

Dylan - Sorry Dylan, I didn't mean to offend you (and I think I did). I usually use the word 'enhanced'…but sometimes the 'm' word tells a more detailed story (i.e. some people may think enhanced could be for more subtle enhancements (colour, etc.) than what some of my images have…so that is why I SOMETIMES use the 'm' word…but not on my website…just sometime in the spoken word). My images (aka creations) on my website are currently described as 'Digital Art-Enhanced Photograph' but I have changed my default for any future images to 'Photograph-Digitally Enhanced'. I'm thinking that is a better description because all my creations start out as photographs.

Carolyn - True that. I struggle with my own importance…not just that of my art. I find it increasingly hard to talk about my art to others because I find that a lot of people do not see the value in art (plus, why bother paying more, waiting for it to arrive in the mail when they can pick up a nice picture from WalMart, Canadian Tire, Rona, etc. for a couple of dollars). And as a result, I find my confidence slipping more and more. I intellectually realize that I am 1 out of thousandS of artists on FAA (and the chances of selling something without local promotion is slim to none), and because of that, I find it increasingly difficult to promote myself locally because when I start talking I find either their eyes glaze over or they misunderstand what it is I'm trying to do. They think I do weddings, family portraits (and other such portraits) and don't understand why I would want to do what I do for the sake of art. (Somehow I have gotten a bit off topic). Anyway, ultimately, I may never be successful (in a material sense of the word), but as I have said before…doing what I do makes my soul (and heart) sing and I'm sure I will plug away at it for years to come and will not worry about what other people have to say.

Good Luck to everyone & Happy Easter!
Lori

 

Adam Jewell

9 Years Ago

Artistic creations are just that. There are no rules to follow. If a heavily manipulated photo is entered in a photo contest it may be considered cheating or even get disqualified but aside from a situation I don't really see how anything is cheating.

Some folks may look at something called a photograph and expect to see a photograph that has not been manipulated. Calling it 'cheating' may just be their way of expressing that they don't like it, think that there is no way it is a 'real' photo because it didn't come out of the camera looking like that or maybe they are just not sure how to achieve similar results.

There is no 'cheating' when it comes to creating something unless maybe it is stolen. For the purposes of contests it may be considered cheating and anyone else who considers it cheating is free to not buy it or ignore it.

With all the different filters available for cameras now the opportunity for cheating is even more blurred. Should a photo be disqualified from a contest because it has been digitally manipulated while a photo that has been effectively photoshopped on the way into the camera with a combo of polarizers, colored or tinted filters and neutral density filters is allowed just because the alterations are baked into the RAW file?

 

This discussion is closed.