Just because they can't see, it doesn't mean that blind people can't be artists. Indeed, there's NEBA - the National Exhibits of Blind Artists - an organization dedicated to showcasing the work of artists who are blind or visually impaired.
But can a blind person be a successful photographer? Meet Rosita McKenzie, 56, from Portobello, Scotland. Her photographs are now being showcased in an arts festival in Edinburgh:
Speaking to the BBC Scotland news website she said she never thought she would be able to take photographs.
She said: "This whole process helps me to burn something into my memory, something I can use to recall as images in your head can become less clear.
"People explain to me more about the things that are around me when I have my camera. [...]
"I have had photographers say that I have captured things they would not have been able to for example I took a picture of a bridge of the Edinburgh Canal and in the bottom right hand corner there was half an image of a jogger.
"I can then have the pictures produced into raised drawings."
And yes, she has a digital camera with autofocus: Link
It is kind of interesting but to praise her art because there is half a jogger in a picture is strange. What about that is something that other photographers are unable to do?
A blind photographer should put together a showing of 47 totally black photo's and title it "life's stills" and I'm sure a bunch of art fobs will trip over themselves to be the first to see it.
http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1897093,00.html
A person with a dog spreads paint and canvasses on the floor and allows the dog to walk on both. When the dog tires of this game the person selects those canvasses that seem to exhibit good composition. Is this art? If so which is the artist?
After viewing the slideshow posted by seldomnice a couple of the descriptions made me think "Well, maybe..." but other than that it all seems like a dog and paint show.
But if it gives them satisfaction I'm glad for them.
Apparently, these artists are not only blind, they don't even have "I"s.
If it makes them happy, sure... but I have a hard time taking them seriously if there is really no skill involved.
'cept for maybe that one with braille.
photography is the capturing of light onto a 2 dimensional surface, be it a screen or a piece of film. You see something, point the camera, take a picture.
blind people cannot see, therefore they cannot be photographers.
They can be painters, sketchers or sculptors for example as the movement of the artists hands is what creates the work, not selecting an arbitrary area of light. They could even appreciate a painting as many paintings have texture
deaf people can be musicians as sound is just vibrations in air and if you cannot hear these vibrations, you can still feel them.
Anyone who reckons a blind person can be a photographer is taking the piss. a blind person cannot know what they are taking a photo of, they cannot know what the finished photo looks like.
The only comparison I can think of is someone with no sense of smell making perfume, they have no knowledge of the ingredients or the finished product.
Sorry for the rant but I saw a blind french photographer on TV a few years ago and ever since, I've wanted to hunt him down and kill him for being such a pretencious wanker
An artist makes choices to make art. Chance can play a role, of course, but nothing done ONLY by chance can be a real work of art! People who cannot see cannot make visual choices, cannot make INFORMED visual choices and can only depend on sighted people to tell them what the result looks like and in what ways it needs to be altered to make it look like it was purposefully made.
What utter rubbish, this blind artist stuff. If some idiots want to buy it, too bad for them, but it ain't art and it won't ever be unless some sighted artist comes along and appropriates it to use in their own original work.
Now as it stands here, I fully agree with the likes of vmos and lulu.
In most advanced countries, the word 'blind' is used to cover a range of sight loss - from totally sightless to those who can't read print or the eye chart but have some remaining sight. There are people in all categories involved in photography for one reason or another. I use photography to extend what I can see, and it is not the random, unsystematic process some people imagine.
Sure the means of expression or recording in photography is to use light to create a 2-d image, though the results can also be made tactile, as Miss McKenzie pointed out above.
What about live and let live? There are surely more worrisome issues in the world than this.