Untitled

is this boring or refreshing in its simplicity--or neither?

is this boring or refreshing in its simplicity--or neither?

C'mon - admit it - you were just about to line up on something else when you accidently pressed the shutter release!

What does this image mean ?

the meaning is for you to decide, not me. if it doesn't mean anything to you, it's meaningless. to me, it means that what is at first glance empty is as full as anything else.

It's really not abstraction to me. You can see some figurative elements: the ladder and the side of the roof.

 

Abstraction is a totally different language that speaks purely with colors and shapes.

 

Maybe cropping off the top part and enhance the texture of the roof would be a good start.

 

Pure abstraction is a very difficult subject in photography. Technically it looks very easy, but this is false assumption. It is the same kind of assumption that taking a sunset is easy; just frame and shoot.

 

The problem is that some (or even a lot of) photographer thinks that way; abstraction is just frame and shoot. Well Im a bit disappointed of this kind of attitude, because to make a nice looking photography, whether abstract of figurative, it is technically the same. But it is far more difficult to get an abstract photo to be acknowledged as equal.

 

Abstraction should not equal to a lack composition, perspective, lights and shadow. Since it does not posses any figurative subject to talk with the viewer, it need to be even more crafted then any other pictures.

 

Anyway thats my part on the abstraction debate.

 

If you want my personal impressions about your picture, it just says: lazy.

 

Try harder.

 

Oops! I thought you said abstraction. But since you ask for criticism, I think it still applies.

 

Minimalism and abstraction is not too far off. Since minimalism is to reduce to the least amount of information to transmit the message to the viewer. But minimalism is more subjective, since you could argue on what is the minimum required.

 

About the discourse on letting the viewer decide is not very honorable to the artist. It looks more to me of an excuse for having nothing say or having failed to transmit correctly what you wanted in the first place.

 

Art is not only about impressions and emotion, there is an artistic approach to transform the subject into a mean of communication. The artist needs to craft his work to be able to be clear about his intention. There is an intellectual process that is going on and this is also part of the work.

 

The point is not to become a trigger that clicks the camera when we feel that the subject is moving.

 

Anyway I should get these ideas into a more crafted text because in this context, no one will read it. : )

 

thanks much for your comments, olivier. a few clarifications, however: a)it is a pic of an empty swimming pool, not a roof. b) i guess i'd rather leave labels like "abstract" and "minimalist" to those not involved in creation. i dont think artists of any stripe have any use for such words. this is so especially when i/you think about whether i've measured up to some sort of mark. for example, have a successfully produced an "abstract" image? this just means, how good is my image compared to some "master" of abstraction. i think schools of art are just labels attached after the fact to 1 or 2 or 3 original/unique artists.

 

i think one of the most brilliant works of art ever--which i didnt recognize until after i'd said "this is crap" about 100 times without really studying it--is the canvas painted white. it falls into the category of "laziness" that you referred too, as i suppose the works of duchamp and the dadaists and many others could be thrown into. but the amount of effort that went into producing a work of art has no relevance to its beauty or effect or depth. i totally disagree that an artist ought to use art as a means of communicating definite ideas. this may happen, but there doesnt seem to me anything wrong with a work just making someone go "huh?".

 

so, about the white canvas: when you look at it, it makes you focus not on itself, but on your surroundings, or your own thoughts, the shadows from the gallery lights, whatever. this is an achievement, and has an aritistic function.

 

p.s. you characterized me as lazy, but how do you know how long i stood next to that pool waiting for the light to shine a certain way? you'll never know...

Thanks for reading my text.

Oh yes, I see! A pool, it makes sense, a big pool.

I approached your photo because you had a presentation that said "please criticize my quasi-minimalist foto". You applied the label yourself, that is why I cared to debate about it.

What made the Dadaist great was the shock value of the piece. It was a political/artistic statement to question the line that separated art and non-art.

"I totally disagree that an artist ought to use art as a means of communicating definite ideas. this may happen, but there doesnt seem to me anything wrong with a work just making someone go "huh?". "

Are you sure you totally disagree that art can communicate?

I have nothing wrong against "huh?" But it still is something communicated. Art is a media.

Sorry about the lazy, but you asked for criticism. I gave my impression, I can be wrong or right, it still is an opinion.

There are various things that can make a piece of art valid. Technique, aesthetically pleasing, shocking, original, ... If it is interesting to no one except yourself, I doubt you really achieved something. Artist always have a very different perception about their work then the rest of the world. It's like a family picture, do you really want to see them, probably not.

Art is not easy or everybody would do it. It is special because people who achieve something that is really appealing to others are rare/talented/hard-working. Few people are willing to make those sacrifices because it is an uncertain career. To be able to transmit to the public what you had in mind when you did your work is a rare occasion. People admire artists because they know that what they do is hard. Most people have tried and failed, that is why they can understand what is so special about it. Having talent is not everything, and our mothers have all told us that we are talented and special, but genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration. (Quote from Thomas Edison)