Wednesday, April 25, 2012



Yes, I used the "A" word to describe myself. To be more precise, I consider myself to be a "visual artist". I produce two dimensional images on paper. I use a camera, and a computer - so what! My images, for the most part, are the result of deliberate study and lots of work. I grant that I do also take and make photographs, but I strongly feel that there are distinct differences between the type of work we normally consider to be photography and that of art. I am positive that the arguments either way could continue forever.

Here is how I break it down for my work. If the image reveals something about the subject that transcends the norm, that it perhaps reveals an essence had not yet been exposed, and it is well crafted, it could be art. If the image is a documentary recording of an event, structure, or that of a naturally occurring scene, it likely is more of a traditional photograph. It could be "artfully" processed, but it is a photograph.