In the last couple of years I have become increasingly interested in fine art. I have had exhibitions of my own work and viewed many more of others'. One thing that has really struck me is that most photographers avoid the relationship of art and photography. Take a look in any photography website and art is almost completely avoided. The 'craft' of photography is emphasised a lot more and most photographers seem to be a lot happier being craftsmen than artists. I'm interested why this might be. Is their only aim to be a skilled machine operator? Since the rise of conceptual art there has been a general fear and confusion of what art is and what has high artistic value, even among artists themselves. Creatives in other mediums though, seem a lot happier to be called artists. Few would take up oil painting for example with any other goal in mind than producing art. It seems strange to me that photographers will passionatley take up this method of artistic expression while at the same time avoiding the idea that they may be an artist. Perhaps it is just that mastering a craft is a lot more tangible and measurable, and therefore safe. Whereas defining what is good art is almost impossible. Or does the camera's nature as a duplication machine mean it is seen as less of a less creative tool than a pair brush? I'd love to hear anyone else's thoughts on this; I've got a bit bored of Aperture vs Lightroom. I know that this is a technology focused forum but there is a wide range of people here, some very talented and many with a creative focus as well as those addicted to gear.