Of course it’s digital enhancement. It’s taking an original capture and changing it. Is it photography in it’s purest form ? Of course not. But it’s still photography using new techniques to enhance it.

+1 to George

If you use a polarizer, are you still a photographer? What about artificial light? Isn’t anyone using any tool beyond a point and shoot on full auto deserving of the label?

Sometimes I think photographers should spend less time wondering “Who is a photographer?” and more time being one themselves.

Don’t hate the player, hate the game!

How anyone could even utter the comment that Yervant is not a photographer is mind boggling. Just because he knows how to make a great photograph and then “design” a piece of art with it, and then win awards for it, I think encourages much jealousy in others.

Remember it all starts with a good photograph. You don’t win awards for bad photography in that class. Why hate the game? What game? If any one of us had the opportunity to achieve the kind of recognition that has been given to Yervant….come on don’t lie to me…you know you would.

In the “old film days” photographers resented the fact that self proclaimed “real artists”, (painters, sculptures, etc), did not consider our craft an art form. You just take a picture, they’d say. Well, now we don’t just take a picture… Now we start with a picture, (hopefully a good one), and then we complete the process with our vision, inspiration, talent and skills. That’s art.

Yervant is a very busy working photographer, he’s an artist, he’s a great businessman, he’s a great teacher. He’s very, very successful and he’s sitting at the top of our food chain. We should all just learn from the guy instead of wasting time trying to label his job title.

Any time spent pondering this absurd question would be much better spent brushing up our photoshop skills… Of course, that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Photography is obviously something different then it was years ago. I agree with Joe…why waste our time even debating that someone is or isn’t a photographer. He is definitely doing a great job and is making some beautiful imagery…no matter how he makes it. I found myself looking at the print competition two years ago at PPA and saying…”are these photographs?” because they were so digitally enhanced, but that is what makes art and photography so interesting. It is always changing and people will always fight the new and upcoming ways. It really is the age old question of “What is Art?” Personally I think art is anything that makes people emote in any way…especially if it makes them question if it is art or not.

- Wendy

Digital imaging is no more “photography” than “cinema” is photography. They both use a camera. They have both evolved into their own genres.

If post-processing is not an art, then painting, sculpturing or any other form of portraying something are not art either. It should be questioned whether just taking a picture and not post-processing it should be considered an art…