"Disney Hall 2" by Lacquelyn Sloane Siklos on Zatista.com

I’ve been pretty obsessed with architectural photography lately. There aren’t too many art forms that are based on capturing other art forms: that’s an interesting notion in an of itself. Of course, it’s much more than that, too — most photographers with a passion for it don’t just stand around pointing their camera at buildings. The subtleties at work make this particular corner of the photographic medium really fascinating.

"Havan Series.2" by Vanessa Lazaroff on Zatista.com

In just the same way that no two painters will paint a particular building or town the same way, no two architectural photographers will shoot anything the same way. Some aim for capturing structures with as little distortion as possible, employing complex lighting schemes to illuminate any and all shadows (while keeping the lights themselves invisible to the viewer).

"Against a Gathering Storm" by Dominique James on Zatista.com

Others seem to be offering their interpretation of the ultimate intentions of the architect. It’s amazing how the right photographer can imbue a building with a air of foreboding or even stoicism.

"Weld Boathouse at Harvard" by Keith Dotson on Zatista.com

And still others play with abstraction and distortion — surrealism within the context of cold, unmoving glass and steel is their game. It’s a bold move to work with illusion in such a rigid context, but the photos end up looking (for lack of a better term) cool!

"Bell Tower" by Kelly Feil on Zatista.com

I have some questions I’d like to lay on an expert in the field — if you’re out there, please speak up. For instance, what qualifies as architecture? Buildings and houses, obviously, and bridges, too. But how about boats?

"Ferry Reflection II" by Susan Grissom on Zatista.com

And how do different points of view figure in to the equation? Does it work to shoot buildings from within other buildings? How important is context, especially in an urban environment?

"3rd Avenue Looking South" by Adam Regan on Zatista.com

I might be over-thinking the whole thing, but it just seems like there are a lot of gray areas inherent in the practice of making art from other people’s art. It’s a great notion, sort of like indirect collaboration. I wonder if anyone has ever compiled a number of different images of a given building and then shown them to the architect all at once. It would be interesting to see which ones align with the original architect’s vision for the structure — but then again, maybe they all would. Regardless, it would make for a great conversation.