Wildlife Photographer of The Year: Art or Not?
The level of photographic work is outstanding, but is it's varied style's and subject matter to diverse to be Art? One of the things that would make an exhibition or book of photography Art , would be a personal style or approach that covered a whole body of work. Can photographs of animals be art? I would say yes and look to "A Shadow Falls" book by Nick Brandt as a example of a outstanding wildlife body of work. Why could "a Shadow Falls " be considered art? It has a unifying style and even message, it has a fine sensibility, images are individually outstanding but even stronger as a set. The photographs in Wildlife photography of the year are equally strong as individual images, but do not have the same cohesion of style as work by one person or even a group of people limited by a geographic location. "Paris in the Springtime", an exhibit at Beetles+Huxley, works because even though it is by different photographers, it is all black and white, set in central Paris. It could be that the world's wildlife shot by many different photographers/ styles/ locations is just too diverse to work as a coherent body of Art.
I would recommend anybody who has the chance to see the exhibit, to see it. I was lucky and saw the exhibition in Winchester Public library, and I was as always impressed by many outstanding images, my favourite being "Eye of a Toad", by Lukasz Bozycki.