<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More on &#8216;art&#8217; versus &#8216;photography&#8217;&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.foundobjectsgallery.com/bartender/2007/11/26/more-on-art-versus-photography/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.foundobjectsgallery.com/bartender/2007/11/26/more-on-art-versus-photography/</link>
	<description>a photography journal</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:14:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julian</title>
		<link>http://www.foundobjectsgallery.com/bartender/2007/11/26/more-on-art-versus-photography/comment-page-1/#comment-88</link>
		<dc:creator>Julian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 07:42:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foundobjectsgallery.com/bartender/2007/11/26/more-on-art-versus-photography/#comment-88</guid>
		<description>Good point Bee. One of my favourite philosophers, Adorno, said that for art to be authentic, the materials and/or techniques used had to bring something unique to the work, to inform the work. So I guess according to that and your comments it is a fair response. Trouble is I don&#039;t FEEL any different! I still think of myself as a photographer - in fact I feel as if I&#039;m doing more personal work now than I&#039;ve ever done. True, ripping and layering photos goes a bit far, but I really don&#039;t think the trips and pairs/fours are THAT far from traditional photography concerns.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good point Bee. One of my favourite philosophers, Adorno, said that for art to be authentic, the materials and/or techniques used had to bring something unique to the work, to inform the work. So I guess according to that and your comments it is a fair response. Trouble is I don&#8217;t FEEL any different! I still think of myself as a photographer &#8211; in fact I feel as if I&#8217;m doing more personal work now than I&#8217;ve ever done. True, ripping and layering photos goes a bit far, but I really don&#8217;t think the trips and pairs/fours are THAT far from traditional photography concerns.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bee</title>
		<link>http://www.foundobjectsgallery.com/bartender/2007/11/26/more-on-art-versus-photography/comment-page-1/#comment-87</link>
		<dc:creator>Bee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:20:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foundobjectsgallery.com/bartender/2007/11/26/more-on-art-versus-photography/#comment-87</guid>
		<description>People who like that what is generally referred to as photography, do so because that stuff has certain characteristics that other art media don&#039;t. Much of this has to do with photography&#039;s special relationship to visible reality. So when your work lets go of those very characteristics those people enjoy, they stop being interested. Blame yourself; it&#039;s fair, I agree with them that you&#039;re crossing a line over to a different field. Fine with me, as you know. But people who are dedicated photo fans will not be happy; otherwise they&#039;d be art fans, not photo fans. Photo vs the rest is not like oils vs acrylics; photography has something that nothing else does. So you get people who are serious about that... because that&#039;s the reason they look/buy. 

As far as I know you&#039;re ex wife is not a photographer so these issues mean little to her, which doesn&#039;t they aren&#039;t real and serious to those committed to the medium. 

But hey it&#039;s da ghetto, man, and you&#039;re breaking out. 

Bee</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People who like that what is generally referred to as photography, do so because that stuff has certain characteristics that other art media don&#8217;t. Much of this has to do with photography&#8217;s special relationship to visible reality. So when your work lets go of those very characteristics those people enjoy, they stop being interested. Blame yourself; it&#8217;s fair, I agree with them that you&#8217;re crossing a line over to a different field. Fine with me, as you know. But people who are dedicated photo fans will not be happy; otherwise they&#8217;d be art fans, not photo fans. Photo vs the rest is not like oils vs acrylics; photography has something that nothing else does. So you get people who are serious about that&#8230; because that&#8217;s the reason they look/buy. </p>
<p>As far as I know you&#8217;re ex wife is not a photographer so these issues mean little to her, which doesn&#8217;t they aren&#8217;t real and serious to those committed to the medium. </p>
<p>But hey it&#8217;s da ghetto, man, and you&#8217;re breaking out. </p>
<p>Bee</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

