Is Digital Camera Photography an Art or Science?

A good question and one that has been pondered by many people is whether digital camera photography can be considered science or art. There is no definitive answer. My own conclusion is that digital camera photography is a bit of both.

I will look at both sides of the argument. I will firstly look at the argument that digital camera photography is a science. People who argue that it is a science stems from the fact that the photo does not come from within as is the case with a true artist. It does not come within the soul and emotion of the artist. The photo is not created by the photograther in the true sense of the word. The artist on the other hands creates the painting out of nothing. The photographer merely presses the button of the digital camera and the takes the shot of the object being photographed. The object is not created by the photographer.

Also what supports the view that digital camera photography is a science stems from the fact that editing may need to be performed on the particular photo. These people argue that the editing process is not an art but a science as there is no artistic procedures performed in the process of editing. They are basically mechanically following certain steps in performing this process. Art does not involve mechanical processes. Art is spontaneous and depends on the emotion of the artist during the painting.

I will now look more closely at the argument that digital camera photography is an art. People who support this argument feel that just because you are not really creating the object you are photographing, you still need to communicate your emotion in the photo. And also they argue that by editing the photo, you are creating something different to the reality. You are also expressing your creativity and emotion by undertaking the editing process. By making use of the light for example, you are putting a different feel to the object in the photo. You are also altering the color to express your emotion. So overall, the end result is the object in the photo will be significantly different than how you see the object with your eyes. The object will be changed through the artistic skills of the photographer. The photo will in effect be his/her creation. The photo will represent the photographer's emotion.

So in conclusion, I think that both sides of the arguments are strong. There is no clear cut answer to the argument.