Discussion in 'Abstract' started by Jon Eckman, Feb 18, 2018.

  1. If both cropped their iceberg images without some context then they just becomes ice texture studies but obviously closer to abstract by definition, but then this forum category hasn't been the hallmark of strictly sticking to the concept of Abstract as a disconnect from reality. There's been downright snap shots posted of obvious subjects that don't even convey anything close to Abstract.

    No one complains, and neither do I. It's all good here.
  2. Norman 202

    Norman 202 i am the light

    would they? without context, how would you know they were ice textures?
  3. Norman 202

    Norman 202 i am the light

    no one is complaining Tim
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2018
  4. Norman 202

    Norman 202 i am the light

    Good points Fred. From my perspective, whenever I look at any photo, I see abstractions so, I suppose, in “Abstract Photography”, I’m more in favour of stuff that’s even more abstract (unrecognisable ?).
    Norma Desmond likes this.
  5. Yes, I totally get that.

    I think abstract art and photography exist on a continuum. I get why the more extreme end of the spectrum would be appealing, and it sometimes is for me as well. But I also like playing with that balance and counterpoint between real and abstract. I try to make sure that photos I post here fall more than mid-way on the spectrum toward abstract, though that's probably not always the case for everyone viewing my work. Sometimes, it's a bit of a Rorschach test. A while ago, I posted a guy's face that was getting strong, geometric bands of shadows that curved with the contours of his face created by mini-blinds in a nearby window. That was pretty literal and some may have legitimately taken it quite literally, or realistically. But, it also seemed to lend itself to seeing the shadows and forms as primary and what they were projected on as secondary. Anyway, I like that sort of tension or dialogue between the real (recognizable) and the abstract so I often just play with it.
  6. Because I'm familiar with the look of textures and by my zooming in as a makeshift crop those two images look like ice to me especially from the texture and that particular hue of blue color.

    Looking at it another way, I derive and base my judgements on the decisions made by what the photographer wants me to look at by way of exclusion and inclusion. There are a number of ways the photographer could've conveyed the subject of ice as abstract but I respect or maybe just accept the photographer's decision to provide scale in size of the subject. The feeling of big-ness becomes part of the abstract in the way it's presented. Cropping out the surrounding water and sky would tell me the photographer doesn't want to communicate that as part of the abstract.

    And my mentioning no one complaining was a poor choice of words. I meant to say going by how very few folks initiate and participate in the Abstract forum, I don't see many folks taking note of whether certain images strictly qualify as abstract in nature.

    I was one when this forum first took off who did take note and I saw that I was hitting a brick wall and so I just let it go.
  7. Hector, I wonder what the Mendenhall looks like now.
  8. Please delete the above post. Thanks.

Share This Page