[Stikin2pentax]

Hi Jim,

Yes, photography is an art form - yet much of the art world might disagree on that topic. Here is the way I see it, the cave man would have loved to have had the tools of the 19th Century artist. He would have been even more pleased to have a camera. His art was most likely more spiritual than decorative - while perhaps educational to his fellow cave kin - his topics seemed to center around hunting for survival. So we may only guess at his motives - most likely we are correct in these assumptions.

And if your good man 'Ugg' also had a high powered rifle...hunting would have been an absolute breeze, and he could have photographed each kill for posterity into the bargain!
The problem with existing cave paintings is that we really don't know exactly what motivated their efforts. When you throw their knowledge of the hallucinogenic properties of certain plants and herbs into the mix, then it gets even more complicated! For sure hunting was the nucleus of life for both the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic peoples, and as such they would have adorned the walls of caves and important rock outcrops with paintings both recording and celebrating this vitally important activity...but I somehow doubt it was for 'educational' purposes.
So we have Ugg recording a kill, Ugg indulging in a spot of 'ritual' painting...and Ugg quite possibly spaced out on various hallucinogenic 'erbs and consequently daubing things with sundry 'vision-quest' inspired paintings...

...So most likely we're not remotely correct in such assumptions at this point in our understanding.