So Michael Jones, an art critic writing for the Guardian has said that Photography isn’t as worthy an art form as painting and doesn’t belong on a gallery wall.I was going to type up a long response but Michael Dooney has beaten me to it and said everything I wanted to say, which is just that Jones is lazy.
Yes there is lots of bad photography that isn’t art (but thinks it is) but I don’t believe that good photographers set out to emulate painting any more than good TV producers set out to emulate cinema. Does watching TV give you the same depth of experience as cinema viewing. Maybe not in the sense of scale and awe that cinema can attain but TV is every bit as powerful when focused on what it does well. Great TV drama is every bit as important as great cinema and great photographs are every bit as important as great paintings.
Picking examples of bad photography and claiming they prove that Photography isn’t worthy as an art form doesn’t prove Jonathan Jones’ argument, it just proves he is a lazy journalist.