When was photography first considered an acceptable art form?

My teacher told me that when photography first arrived on the scene there was some controversy as to whether or not a photograph could be considered a work art because the artist simply captured a pre-existing image instead of creating a new one. (I'm not saying this is true but apparently that bias used to be a prevalent one) Can anyone provide me with some websites with articles etc that explore the topic of photography becoming an acceptable art form and/or old arguments as to why it wasn't accepted at first?

Pooky...I think she was talking about from a historic aspect. When photography first appeared, it wasn't always accepted as art.

Photography first developed (no pun intended) I think in the late 1820s with the discovery of certain materials that were sensitive to light. Actually, the word "camera" comes from what was known as a "camera obscura" which was a small room with an opening at one end where light would pass through and project an image onto a wall at the opposite end. Artists would use the image as a guide for making paintings. The problem was that the image was temporary. There was no way to make it portable. So even then, people were searching for some way to create a permanent image. If you break photography down into its root words, it literally means "recording with light" or "recording of light." Note that this says nothing about a computer or image editing...which some of the Photoshoppers should keep in mind. Photography in its purest form is the "recording of light" :)

Anyway...

Fortunately, at around the same time (1820s-1830s), scientists were discovering materials that were changed by exposure to light. For example, they discovered that when a plate coated with silver was exposed to light and then came into contact with mercury vapor, an image formed. They had to figure out a way to make the image permanent (a "fixer"), but this eventually developed into the daggeurotype. They also discovered that if transparent materials were coated with light-sensitive chemicals, they would also record an image. When it was developed and dried, the image could be projected onto another light-sensitive plate or even paper. The other plate or paper could then be developed. That eventually became the film and positive-print photgraphs that we know today.

Throughout the 1830s - 1850s, there was progress made with improving film and plates so that they were more sensitive and didn't need super long exposures. But at about this time, there was also a little bit of controversy between art critics and photographers. Some of them didn't believe that photography was truly art, because it seemed like to them, they were only recording an image and didn't have much of a role in the creative process. But that opinion slowly changed, and in fact there were galleries all across Europe and the United States for photography.

Most early photographs were still lifes....like an arranged photograph showing a dinner table or a vase of flowers, etc. But considering the early time period, they were actually pretty good.

Also, it's amazing how long old negatives and photographs have lasted. There are plates and photographs over 120 years old that are still very sharp and clear.

You should check out the book "The History of Photography" by Beamont Newhall. Or also try looking on Wikipedia and in your local library. Do a google search for "daggeurotype," "cynotype" etc and see if you can find out more about early photography.

Here is a web page that might help you.

http://www4.hmc.edu:8001/humanities/beck...

Your teacher is correct. It took people like Ansel Adams, Alfred Stieglitz, Edward Weston, etc. to finally get seen as an art form.

I am pretty sure that photography, except for a select few, is not yet considered art.

With the birth of digital and the billions of images hence it probably never will.

Hmm..

Your teacher wasn't even born yet. Of course it is. What class are you taking--philosophy? I don't think this is quite how anyone learn how to use a camera (it's not a photography class, is it?)

Sorry--I didn't really answer your question.

I think the tide towards it being an artform swung in the early 1970s when the Metropolitan Museum of Art hosted a large exhibit of Ansel Adams