What can drawing and painting and sculpting do that photography cannot do? Similar aspects of composition and arrangement, style and form, techniques and themes, can all be harnessed in photography.

>>4436352 (OP)
You get unlimited DoF when drawing or painting.

>>4436352 (OP)
>What can drawing and painting and sculpting do that photography cannot do?
you can create something that does not exist

>>4436354
Photography can make things that don’t exist as well as bear witness to horrors and crimes that cannot be depicted as viscerally and veritably as in photography. Photography can document crime.

>>4436355
>Photography can make things that don’t exist as well
That's inherently not true. All photos are of something that is there. That's how cameras work. Painting and drawing on the other hand inherently must express an emotional state that you are experiencing.

>>4436356
What about mise en scene? Or shadows? Or making a point with something that is absent or unseen?

>>4436359
What about being intentionally obtuse?

you're being retarded on purpose

>>4436361
Well, a photograph can do everything a painting can do. And then some.

>>4436352 (OP)
Photography is just a tool for making images, nothing prevents one taking photos of things that do not exist.

>>4436359
lol yeah you're being obtuse. I'm not saying photography has no artistic merit or that you can't say something with it. Take picrel. There is no way to take a photo of that. There is no way to express that exact emotional state stated through brush work. Photography's ability to document something that existed is why it's compelling. That's why AI photography is not worth anything

>>4436364
The dali photo existed even if you warped it. You can't get around this

>>4436366
Warping the photo enters drawing and painting territory. It is no longer photography, it's collage. You can use photo collage to represent something that doesn't exist, but that aspect doesn't just extend retroactively back to photography.

By nature of being a photograph, the light hitting the film or sensor originates from a physical reality, and there is no getting around that without compelling Jesus the Christ to manifest inside your camera body.

>>4436367
One can always build a scene of a thing that does not exist using whatever tools available including but not limited to drawing, painting, sculpting and photography, point a camera to it and take an exposure of the fake scene.
Myself I like to take a photo (a snap usually) of real scene and then stomp on it until most or all information about reality it was based is lost.

>>4436352 (OP)
What the fuck cares?

Only hacks and academics care about this type of navel gazing trash. Just take photos to say/show whatever you want. Or use any medium you think would suit your aesthetics and stories that you want to tell.

>>4436419
>point a camera to it and take an exposure of the fake scene
It's a real scene. You've taken a picture of something that's real

>>4436538
Painting is just well arranged pigment on a canvas.

>>4436352 (OP)
>What can drawing and painting and sculpting do that photography cannot do?
Real art.

>>4436419
>build a scene
Is this supposed to be a refutation? Because you just admitted to needing to create a thing BEFORE taking a photo of it, as a requisite.

>>4436540
You're missing the point. The "fake scene" you're taking a photo of is real. It exists in reality

>>4436365
I never actually attached the photo. Guess I should go to bed earlier

>>4436550
Yes. The paint you lay down is also real and exists in reality.

>>4436552
I'm talking about what you're depicting. You're being a tallywacker

>>4436554
Okay? So you're saying the depiction can be something that doesn't exist in reality? Yes. I can take a picture of a tree and make the leaves blue. This depiction does not exist in reality. It is really quite simple.