Photography is better than other visual arts because it’s as true to life as anything else, even more true to life than memory or eyesight. A photograph cannot lie; it is a testament, it is evidence, it is justice. It bears witness.

Paintings require interpretation of the artist’s inner feelings and mind. Sculpture requires transformation of bodily energy. Drawings are similar.

>>7611152 (OP)
Every medium has their own strengths and weaknesses. They all serve different roles. You can't really rank them, it's art, not a competition. Ironically, "A photograph cannot lie; " is a lie. Plus you failed to argue why being "true to life" is even a good thing.

>>7611180
>Ironically, "A photograph cannot lie; " is a lie.
Define truth before we begin debating over what lies are. I view truth as empirical reality.
>Plus you failed to argue why being "true to life" is even a good thing.
I thought it was self evident but being able to capture a moment in all its quality and quantity, the ineffable “this” or “that,” is like being able to time travel. You can always experience the moment or photograph over and over again, the same way you were experiencing it firsthand, rather in the misty realms of memory. It’s good for the sake of purity and archival purposes. Don’t you want to spend time with your loved ones again after they die?

ChatGPT thread.

>>7611197
How? I am an ex PhD candidate. This is just how I type because I’m educated (read: smart).

>>7611152 (OP)
>>7611195
First, try to take a picture of something that doesn't exist.

Second: >>>/p/

>>7611199
>something that doesn't exist.
This photograph captured humanity, something that didn’t exist after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.
It also takes a photo of his humanity, which is now gone in the disfigured scars.

>>7611198
An educated person wouldn't think this was a thought worth thinking, let alone sharing.
Basically nothing you wrote is founded in reality whatsoever, and therefor not worth debating.

>>7611201
>This photograph captured humanity, something that didn’t exist after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.
Mental mansturbation, as if humanity is only defined when everything is good and fine.

>>7611201
/r/im14andthisisdeep

Wait, shit, you had me convinced I was on plebbit for a second there.

>>7611203
Typos… are you that mad? I also went to a top 1% institution with Nobel laureates in the faculty.
>>7611204
Even Adorno mused that poetry cannot be written after the Holocaust.
>>7611207
Define humanity in the 21st century. I’ll wait.

>>7611210
>Define humanity in the 21st century. I’ll wait.
Microplastics
Yep, this is part of the human experience too.
This anon said it perfectly
>>7611204
>as if humanity is only defined when everything is good and fine.

>>7611211
How is microplastics related directly to the human condition?

>>7611210
>Even Adorno mused that poetry cannot be written after the Holocaust.
As if i give shit, the human condition is also war, competition, pain, struggle, hierarchy, and discipline just like every other living being, if you want to do progressive pottery just write a book, but a picture of a poisoned man can be taken by anyone.

>>7611216
How can you be on a board for art when you have the brain of a Walmart worker?

>>7611210
And I'm the smartest man ever to live as ordained by the Smartest Man Ever To Live Society. You wouldn't have heard of it, because they only associate with very smart people. Everyone here has at least two Noble prizes, even me, I have four, and that's more than two, twice even.

You're move Bucky Barnes.

>>7611219
>why don't you surrender to my humanitarian definitions and dick flinging?
Very deep 10/10, maybe you should ask yourself why every dreaming faggot living in arts and writing is progressive, and those facing the real struggles of hard labor is more conservative.

You fags talk about muh real empirical true life and yet have no experience on the matter.

>>7611220
>You’re
>>7611222
Those aren’t mutually exclusive. Many writers were conservative and lived in poverty with odd jobs like McCarthy, Gorky, Saunders, Knausgard….

>>7611227
Yheir

>>7611227
I don't defend conservatives, they also have a good degree of lies, but i bash more on progressives because they're the worst when it comes to humanitarian moralfagging and they flood the every academic institution with their mediocrity. Anyways back on the topic OP just posted a bunch of pics and slapped poetry on it, it's not that elaborated.

>>7611152 (OP)
Part of being a photographer is making lies. Just like any good artist or other medium. Even before you've shot something, just by framing alone and the way you choose what to omit or keep in frame, is altering what is "true to life". Things like ASA/ISO, aperture, and shutter speed further distort reality. Aperture can change depth of field, speed can cause blurs... different lenses have different distortion as well pic related, and there's also mechanical differences or errors. film stock with different light sensitivity or spectrum sensitivity, lens filters, polarizers... and we haven't even gotten to how developing is a creative process when you can push and pull film mess with chemistry. then when you get to the point of making prints, you physically dodge, burn, and mask further straying from the "truth". And of course there are creative techniques as well you can use that are extremely far from reality, long exposure, double exposure, slicing and splicing film.

>>7611215
It's human's creation. Something that wouldn't be here if it weren't for humans and it's something that each individual on this planet has. It can't get more human than this.

>>7611240
Nooo, stop proving OP to be a pseudointellectual retard.

>>7611152 (OP)
What's the equivalent of Draw Bridgman Twice for photography?
I assume there's a classic photo collection of mundane objects I can try reproduce twice?

>>7611929
you don't really "copy" photography to learn (I mean you could, but it's not generally done). /p/'s "Bridgeman twice" advice is to always carry your camera with you wherever you go, shoot everyday, and stick to one focal length initially.

>>7611152 (OP)
>A photograph cannot lie; it is a testament, it is evidence, it is justice. It bears witness
Um ackshally in modern law, photographs must be approved by the Judge in court as before it can be taken as admissible evidence. Even then photographs cannot be used solely to deem a person's innocence or guilt; however, video footage can.

>>7611929
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rephotography
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Prince
The problem is exact copy would be near impossible. You’re unlikely to have the same subject. Outside perhaps historical buildings.
At best, you may try emulating their style. Call it master study if you want.
Just use a standard textbook, do the assignments, ask /p/ for feedback.

>>7611152 (OP)
as if a photograph can't be set up
as if its bad that an artist is expressing themselves
get your psedou intellectual bullshit out of here

>>7611929
>What's the equivalent of Draw Bridgman Twice for photography?
Some other BS akin to Draw Bridgeman Twice.
I can't believe people can be this fucking gullible. Fucking disgrace.

>>7612023
What’s so bad about Bridgman?

>>7612042
Absolutely nothing. That's not the issue.
If you don't understand why I'm calling people that "draw bridgeman twice hurr durr" morons, then you are a moron.

>>7612053
Holy shit. It was an innocent question. This is why /ic/ is dying.

>>7611152 (OP)
Photography is too much about money and connections. It's pay 2 win, same as making movies.

>>7611152 (OP)
>photography can not lie
there you have tons of people on social media wearing filters to hide their skin and facial features

>>7612321
That’s them lying in post production.

>>7611152 (OP)
>Photography is better than other visual arts because it’s as true to life
that's why it sucks, and why we paint. lol

>>7612646
Is painting more spiritual?

>>7611195
>I view truth as empirical reality
any empirical reality would have to be filtered through one's perception, which is by definition subjective. therefore it's impossible to have one universal empirical reality, that all humans would agree upon

You ever take a photo of something and get frustrated that it doesn’t truly capture what you’re seeing? That the photo doesn’t quite show the detail or scale or colours that you are looking at? That’s what painting is for.

>>7611152 (OP)
yes and no.
yes, paintings are worse than photography, because painting omit a lot of what is in the environment.
no, painting are an expression of the individual painter.

one medium is showing the truth
one medium is expressing the sovl

>>7612646
What is that image suposed to be? I dont read christian mythology, is that angel mocking the damned or is it trying to help them? Are those souls falling to hell? If so why is there random lions big snakes and demons?

>>7614679
that's what lightroom is for

>>7615674
>one medium is showing the truth
did you miss this post here >>7611240?
also, which truth do you prefer? Sony's, Canon's, Fuji's? Because they all have very different "color science", their colors are wildly different. Does your truth clip the highlights or the shadows? Is your truth exposed just right or at zero? And which white balance does your truth use? And I hope your truth does not use any lenses with optical aberrations.

I swear to god you niggers are so dumb.

>>7616075
framing can omit parts of the truth, but its still showing the truth, though fractured from the whole.

>color science
does a color blind person become void of truth, due to their lack of color?
no, they just lack the whole experience, they still can know the truth, just not have the full experience.

there is no "whole" in a painting, since its all up to the painters interpretation, while with the photographer, you may go to the place where the photo was taken or seek out other witnesses to verify.

>>7616197
your philosophy lags about 100 years, buddy

>>7616197
>while with the photographer, you may go to the place where the photo was taken or seek out other witnesses to verify.
Very limited understanding of photography.

>>7616203
>>7616201
if we're talking about active deception, then painting is still worse, since everything painted is a lie.
either way, the medium chosen is wholly dependent on the individual and their intent, i prefer painting/drawing over photos.

>>7616211
>painting is still worse, since everything painted is a lie.
what if art didn't have to be measured up against truth (in the case we could assert one truth exists)? What art was valued by how much it deviates from truth? By how many things it can create that didn't already exist? What if art didn't have to be a perfect, polished mirror of reality? When was the last time you read a book, you flaming faggot? Is literature worse than photography, because in literature you can lie and make up things that never happened?

>>7616223
>what if art didn't have to be measured up against truth
but it is.
the whole premise of art is based around expressing the truth as one sees it.
everything you do in art first takes the truth, then interprets it according to the will of the artist.

how accurate or skewed it is depends on the artist.
that's why the measure is truth first, inspiration second, and talent last.

if you lack talent, you can still be inspired to produce what the truth has revealed.
but if you lack truth all you have is AI slop.

>>7616227
>takes the truth, then interprets it according to the will of the artist.
there you go, you brainless homo. You interpret reality according to your will. Now ask yourself, which medium gives you more freedom to interpret that reality according to your will? A camera, where you can only fiddle with 3 parameters (aperture, shutter speed and ISO), or paint and a brush, where you can create any colors you want, any shapes, any textures you want?

dude

>>7616231
that's what i said >>7616211 a camara is more true to life than a brush.
while a brush gives you more liberty to create your own interpretation of that truth.

i litterally ended it with:
>the medium chosen is wholly dependent on the individual and their intent, i prefer painting/drawing over photos.

either way, the foundation is still based in truth, the truth is what grounds your artistic pieace. without truth it all just becomes slop, and you end up with shit on a canvas.