Cheap equipment cheapens the classic nude photo. Is it still art?
What constitutes art? Google.com defines art as “the products of human creativity” or “the creation of beautiful or significant things”. This sounds rather subjective. So where do we draw the line between art and garbage? Recently, this has been a discussion on a number of artist’s forums posed in large part due to the relative ease of taking and posting photos on the web. However, the larger issue seems to be the content of the photos being posted. Nudity has always been a subject of art. The human body is intrinsically beautiful and artists have always exploited that beauty. Early sculpture and painting is rife with “nudes”. It seems only natural that as photography became an artistic medium, the art of the nude would translate. The key word here is “nude”. There is a defined distinction between an artistic nude and an erotic photo. This distinction seems to have all but disappeared in this day when anyone with $100, a computer and an Internet connection can purchase a digital camera
