Photography as a legitimate means of artistic expression has come a long way since the early part of the twentieth century, largely due to the efforts of Alfred Stieglitz, Edward Steichen, and others, who made it their task to carve out a place for photography in the art world. Their lives were dedicated not only to their personal work but to educating a public fearful of new ideas in virtually every field; art, music and science. Stieglitz, with help from Steichen, held the first American exhibitions of ‘revolutionary’ works by Matisse and Picasso. He introduced to the public writers like Gertrude Stein and photographers like David Octavious Hill and Julia Margaret Cameron and in doing so, weathered severe criticism. But, he stood firm in his belief that the ‘new’ art—be it abstractions of oil on canvas, pastel on paper, or an image produced from the manipulation of the properties of light-sensitive materials, was wholly deserving of public viewing.

While today’s growing technology gives the artist more options, more freedom to experiment, it also allows anybody and everybody who picks up a camera to be ‘a photographer.’ As the medium becomes more and more accessible, its exclusivity as a means of artistic expression diminishes. Photographic images are a part of our daily routine, and in many ways we take them for granted. Who would think twice before tossing the images printed in the daily newspaper in the trash?

So, we differentiate between the utilitarian photograph that serves the quickened pace of our lives by conveying complex information instantaneously, and the photograph that goes beyond its subject, into the domain of the extraordinary—the photograph that might be called ‘art.’ The utilitarian photograph (unlike the work of art, which arrests the viewer and demands attention) actually saves us invaluable moments. It requires only a cursory glance. A beat. While both the utilitarian photograph and the art photograph might capture a moment or event, only one captures the viewer.

Does art photography as a whole suffer because the medium has become more accessible? No, it only becomes more agile. Art is the window through chaos into the novel, a glimpse of the yet-to-be-defined. Such impressions are shaped by the framework of the artist’s skill and technique, transformed by unique perspective and finally, presented to the viewer. In time, the artist can so faithfully rely upon his preparation and upon the skills he has mastered—that he is free to trust in the moment, in his spontaneous response to opportunity. For a photographer, the decisions made in these moments, the care invested in the process, the printing and the presentation are the elements that will or will not culminate in a work of art.