Photography is not Art

     A photograph is an object. It is a scientific discovery. A record of light. A piece of history. Art is not an object. If art was an object than any man made or natural thing would be art. Every element, every atom, every disease, every living thing, and every non-living thing. How can art be this generalized? If art is everything than art is really nothing.  Is a tree art? If so than who is the creator? If the creator is god, or alah,  or just a random act that was predetermined during the evolution of the universe than the person that photographs it is a copyist.
      I remember the first time someone asked me "if a tree falls in the woods, and there is nobody there to hear it,  does it make a sound." The answer is no. Sound exists because life exists.  When a tree falls in the woods it produces waves that radiate out from it like waves produced in a lake after a rock is thrown into it. Living things, like human beings, have ears that interpret those waves and produce what we call sound.
      While the Mona Lisa hangs in a gallery it exists as an object. Without the company of human influence it is nothing more.  The art in an object happens during it's creation and viewing, not as it hangs in a gallery, suspended in space with no human interaction. Art is the relationship between the artist and his work. Art happens when a connection/relationship between artist and viewer is established. Art is not a painting, a drawing, a photograph, or a sculpture.
     Science is based on facts produced by studying the behavior of things during observation. Science studies how. Art and religion study why. Art and religion are related concepts. The word religion is a latin term that means "to tie things together." One of the most important concepts taught by religion is man/woman's relationship with her/his neighbor. Strong relationships with our friends and family define who we are and give us a reason for living. Without them we are lost.