In 1937 art historian Thomas Craven wrote what is perhaps one of the more pointed critiques of photography. He said: "The argument for the photo-mural, and for all photography as an art-form, is based on two fallacies. The first is that inasmuch as painting is a visual art, the camera, aided by new processes of enlarging prints, could more swiftly and economically discharge the duties of the artist. It is true, of course, that painting is an art of vision, is first presented to the eye, but the material it presents cannot be gathered by the eye alone -- not the artist's eye nor by the eye of the camera. Human vision in so far as it registers any meaning, is not a mechanical operation... The photograph, however disguised or altered, remains a mechanical record. It contains no evidence of mind or imagination."