Digital Nature Photography

What is the true nature of digital photography? Many people have been asking this question for a long time. In fact, when people ask the question about the true nature of digital photography, which often meant to ask whether it is art or not science.
Here are some of the arguments on both sides:

A) Art many people consider digital photography as an art because it allows an expression of emotion. They believe that digital photography is a continuation of the art of drawing or painting.

You see, digital photography is like painting in the sense that, although it does take accurate images of reality, but also allows some modifications across different digital tools available today.

Even without editing many people still believe that digital photography is the art that do not carry the eye of an artist to find a great topic of digital photography. The nature of digital photography as an art has something to do with the fact that an artist is able to express emotions and states through visual themes.

Supporters of the "artistic nature of digital photography" also argue your case affirming its ability to convey emotional messages through aesthetics. The beauty of each photograph, of course, also needs to be credited to the person taking the pictures. One of the strongest arguments for the artistic nature of digital photography is the fact that the picture is rarely really what meets the eye. Through the camera and computer, a person can alter the image in order to present what he or she wants to show.

B) Science some people argue that science is the true nature of digital photography. One argument is that photography, unlike painting, actually comes from something that already exists and not a painters mind or emotion. This can be very persuasive, because, in fact, a photographer does not really make photographs. He or she simply takes them.

Another argument regarding the scientific nature of digital photography is the fact that the issue that people do and adjustments that photographers make are based on a series of steps that it is scientifically reduced. Those who advocate the scientific nature of digital photography may reason that the same number of steps can be taken to achieve the same results. There is a certain quality of constancy about digital photography that makes it a science.

But what is the true nature of digital photography? We read the various arguments supporting science and art. There seems to be no solution to this question, right?
The true nature of digital photography will always remain a paradox. This means that although it may be considered an art which can also be regarded as science. When the paradox of the nature of digital photography is resolved? Well, it is solved when a person takes a digital photograph.

The true nature of digital photography is held by the person taking the pictures. The way a person treats the process defines the nature of digital photography for him or her. It's not quite art is absolutely no science. The true nature of digital photography is a paradox. It may seem contradictory, but somehow true.