What Validates You as an Artist

ok assuming you see yourself as one, how do you feel your art is affirmed?

Thinking about the 5 Love Languages book and how it translates to Artists. Different people feel love and appreciation from different Love Languages. As an artist, you sense your work is understood and appreciated via different sources as well.

For some artists, sales are how they feel valued and heard/seen. Others see more in feedback from friends/family. Maybe winning contests or being published does it for you.

The book goes on to say that having your partner learn to "speak" your love language helps strengthen and deepen your relationship. I think as an artists, since the "love" comes from a broader audience, this is where social media either works for you and gives you what you need or plays a more minor role.

Thoughts? For me its print sales. I find social media annoying, destructive and a playing field geared to extroverts.

IMO, Art has nothing to do with digital. If I want to see the Art, I go to museums.
Talking from used to be "computer graphics artist" official job title perspective.

kf095 wrote in post #18829430
IMO, Art has nothing to do with digital. If I want to see the Art, I go to museums.
Talking from used to be "computer graphics artist" official job title perspective.

So is using film art?

I validate my art. I take photographs for me, that have meaning to me.

I do sell prints and post it on social media - I agree the latter can be destructive but I simply use it as a platform to show my work to those who are interested. I avoid playing any of the social media games or chasing likes/follows.

kf095 wrote in post #18829430
IMO, Art has nothing to do with digital.

So if someone records some music on tape it is art but if they record it digitally it's not? Likewise, if I have a digital image it's not art but as soon as I print it it is? That would seem to be a pretty meaningless distinction. Art isn't about the medium it is about the intent.

Art is the manifestation of the intent to create art.

If I build a shed to store my tools it is a shed. If I build the same shed in a gallery as a commentary on the need for a refuge to escape the boredom of suburban life, it is art. Anything can be art.

Whether or not you like it, or it is good art… or what good art is… or if it is possible for there to even be “good” and “bad” art…. whole different shed full of tools.

I do commercial work to pay the bills and to have a base to do my own work. I really enjoy exhibiting my work and have had some success in that. I had a big exhibit at a gallery here in Chicago last June and I have an exhibit in Hamburg Germany in May. Have a book out which working in bodies of work and projects can be very rewarding and frustrating at the same time. Having said all this I really don't consider myself as an artist. I do get a lot of pleasure from the creative process. I am a photographer. It is my life. it is my living and my hobby.

SeattleSpeedster wrote in post #18829409
ok assuming you see yourself as one, how do you feel your art is affirmed?

For some artists, sales are how they feel valued and heard/seen.

Others see more in feedback from friends/family.

Maybe winning contests or being published does it for you.

For me its print sales.

The problem with the five things that you mention here are that they all look to other people for validation.

The way I see it is that if photographers or any other artists look to others for validation, then the world of art is in a sad state.

I feel validated - most deeply satisfied with my imagery - when it shows something the way that I intended to show it. When the photo itself actually matches up with the vision I had in my mind's eye, then I feel validated, because that is confirmation that all of the effort I expended was not in vain.

The whole point of doing photography is to create images that I "see" in my head. That is the goal. Whether or not other people like it or not - what does that have to do with anything? It's actually pretty meaningless, from a purely artistic standpoint.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18829471
The problem with the five things that you mention here are that they all look to other people for validation.

The way I see it is that if photographers or any other artists look to others for validation, then the world of art is in a sad state.

This!

validation of my own "artistic" creations by others is nice i guess, but I do not need or seek validation for artistic pursuits.

some of my commercial shots or designs have some artistic aspects in their creation, but ultimately they are usually produced to meet another person or company's taste.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18829471
The problem with the five things that you mention here are that they all look to other people for validation.

The way I see it is that if photographers or any other artists look to others for validation, then the world of art is in a sad state.

I feel validated - most deeply satisfied with my imagery - when it shows something the way that I intended to show it. When the photo itself actually matches up with the vision I had in my mind's eye, then I feel validated, because that is confirmation that all of the effort I expended was not in vain.

The whole point of doing photography is to create images that I "see" in my head. That is the goal. Whether or not other people like it or not - what does that have to do with anything? It's actually pretty meaningless, from a purely artistic standpoint.

You nailed it Tom

Art is about expressing ourselves, not seeking validation from others.

SeattleSpeedster wrote in post #18829409
What Validates You as an Artist
ok assuming you see yourself as one, how do you feel your art is affirmed?

I try to take artistic photos, but I don't call myself an artist. As far as I know, no one else calls me one, either. I feel that my work is affirmed when someone knowledgeable says a particular image is good. However, that doesn't change my identity.

Strangely enough, my answer to adults' question "What do you want to be when you grow up?" was always "An artist." But being and doing are different things.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18829471
I feel validated - most deeply satisfied with my imagery - when it shows something the way that I intended to show it. When the photo itself actually matches up with the vision I had in my mind's eye, then I feel validated, because that is confirmation that all of the effort I expended was not in vain.

Unfortunately, I am not an artist so maybe I should not contribute to this thread.

Still, I would like to express that Tom summarized this extremely well. Commercial success or kudos from others may be good for the ego but I do not perceive it as validation of art. In my modest view, art should articulate the artist's vision. If the artist succeeded with that, his work is sufficiently validated.

Does any of that make sense or did I get lost in crazy talk again?

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18829431
So is using film art?

I can't describe photography as the art, to be honest.
Correct compassion is rugs. Machine made rugs are digital photography, ink prints. Hand made rugs (usually looks crappy ) and darkroom prints.

Dan Marchant wrote in post #18829450
So if someone records some music on tape it is art but if they record it digitally it's not? Likewise, if I have a digital image it's not art but as soon as I print it it is? That would seem to be a pretty meaningless distinction. Art isn't about the medium it is about the intent.

Art is the manifestation of the intent to create art.

If I build a shed to store my tools it is a shed. If I build the same shed in a gallery as a commentary on the need for a refuge to escape the boredom of suburban life, it is art. Anything can be art.

Whether or not you like it, or it is good art… or what good art is… or if it is possible for there to even be “good” and “bad” art…. whole different shed full of tools.

Photography is not art. It is photography.
My title was computer graphic artist in English, in another languages it has nothing to do with art.
My computer graphics went to tens of millions auditorium broadcasts, but I still didn't call my self as an artist.

If some one sells his pictures and calls himself as an artist, I can't take it as valid argument. Sorry. It is irrelevant to photography, but commercial trick.

You are the only photographer with digital camera I'm considering to buy the book from, of.

This idea that what medium one uses to create something determines whether it is art or not ..... that's hogwash.

Any medium, tools, materials, and methods can be used to create works of art - true art.

You seem to have an extremely narrow minded idea of what qualifies as art. That is not only sad, but incorrect. Mindsets like that limit creativity and discourage people.