Originally Posted by Neapolitan

You don't have to stare at the sun all day to appreciate the magnificence of a fleeting yet beautiful sunset. The photograph of a ballet is art in itself. Photography is a the perfection of the representation of life that was once done by painting. Photgraphy is just a mechanical act of painting where the movement of the paint brush is replaced by the manipulation of light through the lens, the stroke of the brush is replaced by the aperture. A photograph is a reflection of a point in time it is not greater then what it represents, yet limited as it is, it reveals some detail of life that might be overlooked. Even though the ballet is seen as superior to a still photograph of a ballet, and the performance itself more important the practice that goes into it. I think it is just as important to appreciate the practice, the performance, and the documentation of it, as all it goes into a fuller understanding each reenforces the point of veiw of the other. Hilaire Germain Edgar De Gas is famous for his paintings and drawlings and sculptures of ballerinas, he was drawn to ballet and he drew ballerinas and his drawling of ballerinas draws you into his perspective of the ballet. He captures the minute details of the behind the scenes of the ballet, if you seen one of his drawling you could almost imagine hearing one of the ballerina exasperatingly saying "fatigue!" Lynn Swann who who played for the greatest sports team in American history, the Pittsburgh Steelers, took ballet lessons along with tap etc, he said of them "They helped a great deal with body control, balance, a sense of rhythm, and timing." Who knows what would had happen if he didn't take those lessons, maybe Pittsburgh Steelers might of only have four instead of six Superbowl rings. I never been to a ballet except seeing Pyotr Illych Tchaikovsky's Nutcracker Suite and Swan Lake on televison.