Re: Is photography design?

September 28th, 2011, 9:25 am

crewkid
step four
step four
Posts: 471
Joined: October 19th, 2004, 8:19 pm
Location: Boston MA
Iab: I think you are confusing a tool for design itself.

I think you have shown fantastic examples of how a tool was used to create a Design, but the tool is not the design.

Re: Is photography design?

September 28th, 2011, 10:33 am

iab
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 2693
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 6:03 pm
More semantics.

You can make the same arguement with art. A photograph is not art, it is a tool to create art.

But you cannot divorce the object from the art or design. Without the physical photograph, you do not have art. Without the physical photograph, you do not have design. Without the "tool", there is no design. In certain cases like I posted, the tool is the design.

Re: Is photography design?

September 28th, 2011, 11:38 am

User avatar
rachelkroft
step three
step three
Posts: 133
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 2:11 am
Location: San Francisco
iab wrote:More semantics.

You can make the same arguement with art. A photograph is not art, it is a tool to create art.

But you cannot divorce the object from the art or design. Without the physical photograph, you do not have art. Without the physical photograph, you do not have design. Without the "tool", there is no design. In certain cases like I posted, the tool is the design.

But the road (tool) to the destination (design) is not the same. It is one method to get there. I agree that a photograph could be a tool/method for leading to an eventual design (inspiration, reveals something in process). But a photograph is not the design.
Rachel Kroft
www.rachelkroft.com

Re: Is photography design?

September 28th, 2011, 1:41 pm

User avatar
snelwagen
step one
step one
Posts: 39
Joined: October 5th, 2010, 2:35 am
Location: Netherlands
iab wrote:
And photography is just taking a picture? You don't set up the lighting? You don't direct the props and talent? There are no post production effects? I guess anyone can be Ansel Adams or Annie Leibovitz then.

Every example I have shown, the photos and drawings, have been stand alone. The communicate a message to an audience. As a matter of fact, they communicate a specific message to a specific audience, they are not vague in any way. They are the end product. Nobody, even you, has disputed those facts. How is that not a design?

Your question is moot and completely off topic. This thread is not about who is the designer, it is about can a photograph be a design. I have posted examples. I agree not all photos are a design. But if some photos can be art, why exactly can't some photos be design?
I dont think my question was very off topic, rendering is nothing more than digital photographing.

Photos's can be art for sure, but in my opinion if you design something you create something new. A photographer does not create anything new. He shows a situation/scene in an artistic way, maybe just like some painters do. In my opinion photographers fall under the category artists and not designers.
Last edited by snelwagen on September 28th, 2011, 1:53 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Re: Is photography design?

September 28th, 2011, 1:46 pm

iab
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 2693
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 6:03 pm
rachelkroft wrote:But the road (tool) to the destination (design) is not the same. It is one method to get there. I agree that a photograph could be a tool/method for leading to an eventual design (inspiration, reveals something in process). But a photograph is not the design.
Without the photograph, how does the company communicate to its customer if you wear our product you are a s3xy young man with rock hard abs?

Re: Is photography design?

September 28th, 2011, 1:57 pm

iab
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 2693
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 6:03 pm
snelwagen wrote:Photos's can be art for sure, but in my opinion if you design something you create something new. A photographer does not create anything new.

???

I quess you have never heard the saying "There is nothing new under the sun."

Re: Is photography design?

September 28th, 2011, 2:06 pm

User avatar
snelwagen
step one
step one
Posts: 39
Joined: October 5th, 2010, 2:35 am
Location: Netherlands
iab wrote:
snelwagen wrote:Photos's can be art for sure, but in my opinion if you design something you create something new. A photographer does not create anything new.

???

I quess you have never heard the saying "There is nothing new under the sun."
With a photo thats always true, because the objects shown are already there. They are shown on an artistic way....

Re: Is photography design?

September 28th, 2011, 2:10 pm

User avatar
rkuchinsky
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 5973
Joined: July 3rd, 2005, 9:20 am
Coroflot: 33013
Location: Toronto, Canada
This is getting circular and silly. Perhaps I can put an end to it.

First off, art vs. design. Without going to much deeper, I think they are not mutually exclusive. A working definition I think could be that art is expressive (ie. the artist is communicating to the viewer an emotion, message, etc.) while design is impressive (ie. provides a function for the user). That being said, certainly art can be design and design can be art. At it's most basic, you could say that most art is also design in the way that art is also about providing the function of a an emotional experience. This function is fully valid in design as it is a basic function on the Maslow's hierarchy of needs and really no different than the primary function of a teddy bear or the secondary function of a car, or other expressive designed object.

Now then, in photography, there are obviously different kinds I think we need to separate. There is photography as documentation (ie. snap a pic of something with your iPhone) in which the photo itself is just a particular media (ie. 500 years ago you'd draw it or paint it), and photography as an endeavor unto itself, which includes commercial photography, artistic photography, etc. The photo is the end result regardless of if it is part of a larger whole (ie. ad campaign, put in a frame, photoshopped, etc.).

Design is a process of making things ("things" used as a shorthand as obviously you can also design UI, UX, non-tangibles) that have a particular intended function. In the process of doing so, various tools are used such as pencils, paper, CAD, whatever. The design is then manifested or manufactured where additional inputs such as tooling, engineering, etc. are involved. At the end, the design is also part of a larger whole, such as a brand, a package, a marketing strategy, distribution, etc.

Thus, I propose that -

1. photography (not snapshots) is purposeful and the intent of the photographer = intent of a designer
2. in photography anemotion or visual message is the function of the photograph = function of a designed object
3. photography being a part of something more is no different than design being part of a larger process or system.

Therefore photography, if all above is qualified, is = design.

R
The Directive Collective
http://www.directivecollective.com

Re: Is photography design?

September 28th, 2011, 2:55 pm

crewkid
step four
step four
Posts: 471
Joined: October 19th, 2004, 8:19 pm
Location: Boston MA
iab wrote:More semantics.

You can make the same arguement with art. A photograph is not art, it is a tool to create art.
Agreed on both points :D

Re: Is photography design?

September 28th, 2011, 7:09 pm

User avatar
nxakt
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 1031
Joined: March 15th, 2010, 5:11 am
Location: Central Shanghai
rkuchinsky wrote:Therefore photography, if all above is qualified, is = design.
Richard, coming in on the third page and tying it all into a tight closing argument. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, plus one for Richard.

Re: Is photography design?

September 30th, 2011, 1:52 pm

User avatar
yo
Administration
Administration
Posts: 17353
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 6:57 pm
Coroflot: 67242
Location: SoCal
Maybe we should ask some photographers why they call themselves photographers and not designers.

Re: Is photography design?

September 30th, 2011, 7:33 pm

User avatar
nxakt
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 1031
Joined: March 15th, 2010, 5:11 am
Location: Central Shanghai
Because calling yourself a photographer increases your chances of getting laid.

Re: Is photography design?

October 1st, 2011, 8:35 am

User avatar
Playdo
step three
step three
Posts: 172
Joined: December 17th, 2009, 5:54 pm
In many ways a photographer is a designer; a designer of photographs. From composing the subjects in their desired location, creating the type of light that they're looking for, to choosing the DOF and adding processing techniques. All of this is the design of the image.

Would I call a photographer a designer? No, I'd call him a photographer. Though, if there was no such title, perhaps it would be a photograph designer. A graphic designer uses graphical elements to 'design' an image. It's a fine line.

Re: Is photography design?

October 1st, 2011, 12:04 pm

Hoodzy
step three
step three
Posts: 188
Joined: August 15th, 2009, 1:51 pm
Location: Canada
This reminds me of the design vs engineering thread....
Designers design
Engineers engineer
Photographers photograph

Yes they may share some characteristics. But obviously they are clearly different.
You don't hire a photographer to design a car
You don't hire an engineer to take a photograph
You don't hire a designer to engineer a car

Re: Is photography design?

October 1st, 2011, 1:33 pm

User avatar
rkuchinsky
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 5973
Joined: July 3rd, 2005, 9:20 am
Coroflot: 33013
Location: Toronto, Canada
We are not talking about job titles. In the same way a fashion designer and industrial designer and graphic designer are not all the same.

R
The Directive Collective
http://www.directivecollective.com
Reply