Photography - photocopying or art?

Watching the televised opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics, I thought about the relation of photography to other arts.

For example, what is the contribution of the photographers who shoot at the ceremonies? A huge amount of artistic and technical effort was invested in the ceremonies, thus you could say that in a single snapshot 99.9 percent of the effort was contributed by others than the photographer. But is it really so?

Lets take another art form - architecture. There are architects who think in photographic terms, so that in a sense they are creating sets for a generation of photographers to use. What these photographers contribute is harder to define.

Is a photograph a reality by itself, or is it just a reflection of outside reality (and art)?

Perhaps these are pessimistic thoughts, but I don't feel so. For me taking photos is a way of seeing what I am seeing - a beginning amateur's try at understanding a bit of the world.

And I must admit that often the fun part of photography is thinking about potential photo opporturnities, and then it is not so important to make use of all of them. Perhaps at some later stage...