Are photos capable of abstraction?

[je ne regrette rien]

I think this is a very good photograph.

And @inoneeye is presenting it how it should, and how I learned in this thread: just giving a very tiny hint, if at all.

 

All elements needed are in this frame, it's the viewer who shall watch and figure out, connecting all the dots.

 

But beware, the dots to be connected are not only in the picture, they are also, and maybe mostly, in the heads and the eyes of those watching.

[je ne regrette rien]

I gave it a further thought and another idea came my way: the message through a photograph is not necessarily what it portrays, but it can be definitely what the photographer sees in it, or rather projects into it. @inoneeye's selfportrait is one, but rather a metaphor of the specific selfportrait. And in addition there is something I can't figure out, and that is the contribution of the female picture in the background to the self-portrait. I just don't know enough.

 

And maybe that is one key as the spectator: always keep in mind that we don't know enough.

 

And the photographer shall avoid too obvious connections between their idea, which may be pre-existent to the act of photographing, and the photograph itself.

 

This is for the moment my intuition, but it may have to be further explored and refined.

[samstevens]

I just don't know enough.

When I look at a photo and don't know, I defer to how I feel. Sometimes feeling is enough knowing.

[je ne regrette rien]

When I look at a photo and don't know, I defer to how I feel. Sometimes feeling is enough knowing.

Sometimes.

But having the awareness of not knowing opens up new horizons to me. ;)

[samstevens]

But having the awareness of not knowing opens up new horizons to me.

Yes. I understand. And you're in good company ...

 

"True knowing (Wisdom) is knowing what you do not know." —Socrates

 

there is something I can't figure out, and that is the contribution of the female picture in the background to the self-portrait

Now, I did say, "Sometimes feeling is enough knowing." But that should probably be expanded. Feeling can be enough and it can also be an introduction to knowing.

 

Speaking for myself, the contrast of masculine and feminine and, as Supriyo pointed out, the solidness of the stone compared to the more ethereal background, makes me feel a certain way and, somehow, in that feeling comes to me a clue (of knowledge) of what the photographer was after. Not necessarily what he meant, but what he wanted to express for himself and elicit from a viewer.

 

I think there's a sense in which the new horizons are explored in trying to figure something out that's not evident or in being satisfied with what's not evident ... or some combination of those two. I think a good photographer is often able to inspire viewers to try to figure something out or to realize that the open-endedness is intentional ... or, again, some combination of the two.

 

A self portrait can be an invitation to the viewer to figure out himself as much as figure out the photographer. That may just be where the essence of this self portrait lies, in photography as much as in the photographer. Also in how the photographer relates to the viewer (both consciously and instinctually) as well as how the photographer sees himself.

 

I think this may be where a series or body of work can help in figuring out what's there to figure out or not and how much the photographer is pointing to himself and how much to the viewer and how much to the photograph.

[je ne regrette rien]

I think this may be where a series or body of work can help in figuring out what's there to figure out or not and how much the photographer is pointing to himself and how much to the viewer and how much to the photograph.

Definitely. I see a series as a much richer means to convey a message. It's complex, because the increase of variability of visual stimuli may open up very different directions, different from those of the author.

 

Nevertheless this thread is bringing me very rich insights!

[q.g._de_bakker]

Very old and well known ones, however.

[je ne regrette rien]

additionally, I wonder how the portrayal of a bust as opposed to a real person impacts the image. That longing, lure and tension in relationship is not only in the physical or temporal distance between the foreground and the background (perspective and focal blur), but also in the manifestation of trapped emotions in stone (or plaster, doesn’t matter), the inability to reach out, to respond. At the same time, the bust symbolizes agony that is frozen in time, making it immortal. To me, it speaks of transient feelings (lust?, image of woman in background seems alive, hence perishable) vs timeless emotions (longing, agony, heartbreak, portrayed through a stone face that is immutable). The image shows that one can transform into another. In other words, what is today’s lust can become lifelong agony.

As a matter of fact I would say that both the bust and the picture in the background.

And the connection and tension is created by the photographer (@inoneeye) when he saw and juxtaposed these two different visual elements, which nevertheless match.

[je ne regrette rien]

edit*

 

As a matter of fact I would say that both the bust and the female picture in the background contribute to the representation of the self-portrait of @inoneeye. In fact I see the life in the bust and some ethereal element in the female portrait. The man portrayed in the bust seems to me somehow engaged in a serious conversation. The dancing female looks ethereal, while the bust is alive only because of the self-representation, she appears alive.

Edited March 1, 2022 by je ne regrette rien

[inoneeye]

It has been a great read! Thanks

 

"Not necessarily what he meant, but what he wanted to express for himself and elicit from a viewer.

 

Supriyo said: ↑

additionally, I wonder how the portrayal of a bust as opposed to a real person impacts the image. That longing, lure and tension in relationship is not only in the physical or temporal distance between the foreground and the background (perspective and focal blur), but also in the manifestation of trapped emotions in stone (or plaster, doesn’t matter), the inability to reach out, to respond. At the same time, the bust symbolizes agony that is frozen in time, making it immortal. To me, it speaks of transient feelings (lust?, image of woman in background seems alive, hence perishable) vs timeless emotions (longing, agony, heartbreak, portrayed through a stone face that is immutable). The image shows that one can transform into another. In other words, what is today’s lust can become lifelong agony.

 

“Interpreting this image as a self portrait invites all manner of thought, presents multiple paths to follow, and raises questions too.” RR

 

“All elements needed are in this frame, it's the viewer who shall watch and figure out, connecting all the dots. are in this frame, it's the viewer who shall watch and figure out, connecting all the dots.“ jnrr

[je ne regrette rien]

Symbolic

 

"encounter of faiths"

 

 

Abstract

 

"the time of the juggler was yesterday"

 

[samstevens]

To me, the first photo above is more a picture of symbols than it is one that uses them or one that employs symbolism. It captures more of the graphic character of the symbols and not much faith, IMO. It has a more documentary than transformational feel.

 

There’s more for me in the second photo. The bottles, the woman’s back, the gaze and “connection” between the man in the poster and the woman, the long view down the street, the blocked shadows give me a sense of absence or rejection or distance. There’s also something suggestive in the triangle formed by the poster, woman, and bottles, my attention drawn to those empty bottles left on the sidewalk. Absence and yesterday are in that same ballpark I spoke of above, in nearby rows.

 

In the second photo elements seem to be actively working and interacting. The first is more of a presentation where I don’t find the symbols all that symbolic, perhaps because there’s nothing much in the picture supporting, influencing, or playing off of them.

[inoneeye]

In context an interesting word....

mell

...s

 

Edited March 5, 2022 by inoneeye

[je ne regrette rien]

To me, the first photo above is more a picture of symbols than it is one that uses them or one that employs symbolism. It captures more of the graphic character of the symbols and not much faith, IMO. It has a more documentary than transformational feel.

That is absolutely correct if you consider just the mural painting.

But there's a few more "dots" to connect: this painting is on one of the walls of the Tiber, in Rome, the cradle of Christianity, close to the Vatican, the holy see. Close to this site there is the main Synagogue of Rome and the Ghetto surrounding it. Approximately at the intersection there is this wall painting.

[samstevens]

Sometimes, further information and some background context affects my understanding or feelings about a photo. In this case, my take on the photo as a photo is pretty much the same both without and with the info you’ve provided. If the photo were part of a series that showed some of the sites you’re referencing, I might get a different feeling from it, but the knowledge of its location, while interesting, doesn’t impact my sense of the photo much.

[je ne regrette rien]

Recall what I mentioned to you about series?

 

And thanks for the rich inspiration you just gave me!

[samstevens]

Recall what I mentioned to you about series?

I do. You presented here in isolation so that’s all I could react to.

[inoneeye]

Where's the context?

the photo where the word is found. "encounter of faiths"

[Allen Herbert]

A photograph that uses shapes, lines, to offer a abstract perceptive. Allen "Abstract" the meaning.

 

"the time of the juggler was yesterday" Phil.

 

Phil a street photo, ,little else. Where is the juggler ? Is he hiding somewhere.? Is he hiding in yesterday? Have you got that yesterday photo? Pray do tell.

 

"In context an interesting word" Inoeeye.

 

Where's the context?

 

A Photograph ,uses shapes, lines, in a way that does not try to represent the appearance of people or things. Abstract. Someone's rear end does not really do that.

[je ne regrette rien]

I'm not Phil.

[Allen Herbert]

Anyway, on the Philosophy forum we like to change the meaning of words.

 

Sort of a fun thing to do; and have endless discussions about their meaning.

 

Enjoyed the photos, thanks.

[Allen Herbert]

I'm not Phil. Je ne.

 

Then who are you ?I've been speaking to for endless years. Is this a guessing game?

 

Actually, I was rather fond of Phil. He posted some thoughtful interesting photography.

 

Shame, he is not still with us.

 

Your photos are good. Enjoyed them. And for me, that is what is all about.

Edited March 5, 2022 by Allen Herbert

[Allen Herbert]

Anyway, how about a photo, of a pretty girl ;)

 

[Allen Herbert]

Good night and God bless.

[inoneeye]

mell :)

NOUN

1. a heavy hammer; mallet.

transitive verb. 2. to beat with a mallet; hammer.

VERB

2. to mix, blend, mingle; meld