People complain that digital cameras destroyed photography; they lament, film photography is more authentic. Some whine that everyone with a cell phone is a photographer, as though they are aggrieved by that notion. I have watched grown men fight about Nikon versus Canon. There are endless online forum posts, written by highly intelligent PhD folks, arguing Epson is better than HP or vice versa.
Mine is better than yours; this is better than that.
In the mid-1990s, I belonged to a local artist group in the town where I lived; it was predominantly painters, with perhaps four or five photographers, including myself. There were about one hundred talented members. We would meet monthly; I participated in writing for their newsletter and I enjoyed learning about other artists’ perspective. Often I would consider a painter’s point of view for my photography. They liked me too, as long as I did not call my photographs “art.” Unfortunately, their extreme jealousy of one another’s artistic talent, their seething envy, was too much for me; I left the group.
Arguing, what I do is better than what you do, is necessary for some people. Yet perfect art does not exist; when it comes to art, it is subjective, art is in the eye of the beholder. Knowing that fact does not deter some artists from bickering or thinking their art is better (or their camera, printer, car, blender, etc...). Should we judge them harshly for sharing their emotions passionately?
I prefer to devote my energy into making more expressive photographs; my artwork is my opinion and through it I express myself.