Abstraction #1

Words fail me.

There are images which I often find entrancing; in part, the appeal to the senses overrides any intellectual attempt to 'cognitivize' the image. In photography, light penetrates into the darkness of the camera obscura. Light penetrates darkness, to yield clarity and all that it enshrines, although in this image, light has failed in its wrestle with darkness, and the image cannot be known, except through the groping around with the senses to appreciate its strengths.

 

And despite this, some appeal is there; perhaps as a prefiguration of an embryonic experience captured on film, or a failure of experience.

 

Might I see things this way when I cannot find my glasses? That too is possible, and so is a limitation of experience, rather than an 'embryonic' one. But might perception be more interesting to see in such a way? Perhaps, if the path to explore this by the senses is permitted.

 

But again, the intimation for a deeper - a more acute - experience wells up in me. I suppose this feeling is called 'desire'. Which returns me to my initial point about this image revealing the sensual-eroticised sphere of image perception.

 

Obliterating the ambiguity for a moment - and there is much - one relies on Gestalt to make sense of the image. The focalisation on the two dominant bright areas dominate the lower field of the composition. Ejecting from the crevice between the paired structures is a figure, arising with the force of Athena from her father's hemispherical lobes.

 

Yet this is not about intellect: Athena's eruption from her father's head is an archetype, symbolic of universal experience, however the goddess of tensions (war) in this image seems divorced from its own wisdom. Still reminding myself that this is a purely sensual experience of the image which I hold onto, it dawns on me too that the image is grasped through the textures - the fine threads of striations which work light centripetally towards an understanding of the paired structures as the fertile ground in which the senses appreciate this image. It prefigures creation, just as Athena's birth itself was a moment of eureka, for her male father Zeus, whose bewilderment at how he conceived a daughter alone left him groping for the centripetal focus in this image, wondering if he possessed the faculties of this image, or Hera's wrath for infidelity. Coming to his senses in his role as Zeus, feelings are deftly subordinated, as justice is weighed up in the pronouncement of thunderbolts. For me, a mere mortal, the presentiments are not lucid; there are no flashes of insight; no cognitions to grasp this image. What is left, then is the foregrounding of visual texture through monochrome in the hair-like structures which aid the viewer to feel his way towards the nodes of the paired structures and therefore into the image; this is a sense orientated grasp of the image, and not necessarily one which makes 'sense' of the image perhaps.

 

Perhaps again this drama is the prototype of an image; the language of creation is inherent in the symbolic structures. Again intellect goes no further than this statement, since this is not an image to be realised for the higher senses. Its sensuality is momentarily gripping, however brief that hold lasts, before the viewer relaxes his grip of the image and clicks onto something else; the image lets go of the viewer's senses, as the viewer himself cannot sense beyond the visceral data. Despite the repetitions; despite the efforts to penetrate the image, just as in commenting, I repeat myself, trying a different tact to enter the image from different angles. Impermeable finally.

 

Sensing what I do, therefore about this image, I am more than prepared to pass it by.

 

Kind regards.

Jesus god, Jason, you'd do _really_ well in a postmodern lit crit class. That's not necessarily a compliment.

 

It looks like an explosion in a chicken coop to me.

 

 

 

 

I want some of what he's smoking!

Thanks for the link to this page, Bob... If anyone thinks that Jason is an idiot, I think he's gravely mistaken. From what I understand, and my English certainly doesn't "work" as well as Jason's, what this critique says - and says well, and to me, with a fair dose of brilliant humor -, is that this picture is an abstract that is for this viewer strictly limited to the form. It has no content and no obvious symbolic exit.Basically, Bob, your picture is a beautiful dud and doesn't lead to anything more interesting than what it appeared to be at first sight.

In 2 words: an empty form.

The difference between Jason's critique and many others on this site is not so much the content than the fact that Jason appears to have tried all sorts of ways to "penetrate" the secrets of this abstract. He basically gave your work a chance before dismissing it - at least partly.

If you ask me, that's what I dream all of us would do rather than stepping on somebody's art with 3 words and no effort.

So, Jason, if you read this, you are welcome to my pages, and that's valid for long or much shorter critiques...:-)

How refreshing to see people who respect what they look at eventhough they may not be in love with it !

I say: totemize Jason on Photo.net ! :-)

(By the way, Bob... From an empty form, I expect an empty form, and I like this as such. Regards.)

I can only assume that Jason is pulling our leg. Some of that rambling drivel is so poorly written and wildly obfuscated that we can only hope that it was intentionally horrible. If not, his insecurity is glaring and his eloquence sorely lacking. As for the picture, I find it obfuscated and lacking too but suppose it could appeal to some. To me it looks like some bizarre male pattern baldness.

I certainly appreciate the effort Jason took with his critique. I can extract meaning from it, just as some people may be able to extract meaning from this image. Neither are essentially obvious at first glance!

 

You can think of this image as a visual analog to a Zen koan. It may not make much sense at first, but perhaps you get out of it more than is really there. It's just a catalyst.

 

Then again maybe I just got tired of well exposed, pretty shots of critters!

"oooooh, wow, dude - i get it now - it's upside down!"

 

I happen to be a big fan of abstracts, and those which have movement as part of the compositional elements. Of course, the image must create some movement in me as well, if I'm to like it. I think what I like most about this image is that it impels me to use my imagination to view it.

Did the dog sign a model release?

The last comment sums it up beautifully, for me. What a fun thread.

 

Now, my first impressions of this photo were, after looking at your bio photo, hmmmmmm, well, errr, its the other end, in black and white. Do I get the kewpie doll?

It looks like a woman jumping into flames. I guess I like it.

Definitely reminds me too much of an animal nose to be too mysterious to me. Does in a way look like a woman jumping into flames though, that's what I first thought.

Ink blot psych test with a twist! Love it!

- A close up of gorilla's nose when sneezing

- 90o clockwise rotation: a cheerleader dancing or a boxer fighting in the light

- 180o rotation: a werewolf taking a shower

- 90o anti clockwise.... heu ...90o anti ...ehem... I just start to worry... are the one who is suppose to organise the database of this site...?!...

happy new year Bob! <:o~~~@

I do not understand somebody who rates this image low on originality, unless the see images like this floating around everywhere. Also, that was a wonderful critique Jason.

 

Best wishes,

 

--Dominic

A digital blot being compensated by much typing. It says a lot about the myth that says that a picture is worth a 1000 words (with the deflation in grammatical abilities in the present generation, the exchange rate has remained about steady). Consequently, words have been compensating (notice the repetition?). Sentence this be? Paragraph by double carriage return is thus.

To the intuitive eye this does logically fall into the "woman after intense light and Photoshop effects" category. Extended arms, at least one leg extended, photographed from above as face is facing camera.
As an abstract it is both beautifully conceived, but on a scale from John-Adams-tongue-in-cheek to Andy-Warhol-let-the-process-do-the-art, I think it falls within the Ansel-Adams-is-gone neighbourhood.
The composition is very well conceived, which is nothing to scoff (sniff?) at, considering this is an abstract.
I like it, specially the digital blown-highlight pom-pon effect against the conflicting rooted and anchored on the background effect suggested by the woman (or shall we say, humanoid figure) from which this sprouted.

Now that I've gotten my intellectualloid comment collapsing in its own intellectualloidism (aha!) which is both criticism-proof and criticism-friendly, and spiraling in its self-conscious disregard of (to?) rhetoric and structure, I should say: IT MADE US LOOK AND (gasp) THINK! (Mission Accomplished).
Just like any other long, winding written analysis, any abstract (such as this) is either to be agreed upon or dismissed.
Such is the abstract (i.e. not concrete, spoon-fed) world.
Considering Bob's gravitating around well-exposed, straight and disciplined portfolio, one should recognize the creativity on both sides of the brain; not many portfolios show evidence of this (read: variety). And that, gentlemen/gentlewomen/gentlehumans/gentlebeings, is worth more than the picture alone.
Tutankh-amen.

Do I win anything if I guessed right?

Did I guess correctly Bob? ;-)

 

Just playing, thats what I see when I look at the picture. Its a great picture overall, I love it. Has huge potential to be colorized.

I don't care what it is, but I think that it is fantastic! - 7/7

I see somebody finally found Timothy Learys lost stash.

I dont have any clue what is this, but this is for me a brillant dramatic abstract, but I can see a face too!

Biliana

Fantastic!

We cannot conceive of matter being formed of nothing, since things require a seed to start from even if completely causeless; it is not reliant on a thing; it is its own reward, its own pleasure. It is immutable and immovable even as it is constantly changing and forever increasing in its movement into its own manifestation of something.

 

chase

Interesting dialog here.

 

The white spots in the image are a little too high key for my tastes, unfortunate, as otherwise it had potential.

The proverbial blind person's vision of an elephant?