[brookst]

> One should not produce photographic art without

I'm very wary of any claims abut what artists "should" do.

There's good art, bad art, wise art, dumb art. Declaring that anyone who picks up a camera is implicitly agreeing to be bound by this kind of stricture.

Outsider art is a thing. Most of it is terrible, some of it breaks new ground. But I wouldn't say any of it is "doing art wrong" because they took the outsider approach.

[snowwrestler]

Please read the rest of my comment. There's no "stricture," but if one engages in an artistic form without even the most basic awareness of its context, then one opens oneself up to a wide variety of criticism.

If anyone is trying to impose strictures, it is the comments above who try to declare criticism off-limits because there was not a "journalist" label or something.

Simply faking an animal portrait is not groundbreaking or "outsider." It's been done, and it's boring.

[nimajneb]

I agree, there is no correct or incorrect way to do art or express yourself (with some obvious exclusions like racism, harassment, etc)

[snowwrestler]

Who said "correct or incorrect" besides you? This conversation is about whether a photographer can be criticized for posting faked pictures (they can).