January 14, 2010 at 3:34 pm #1761
Photography in the abstract style. Difficulty: No stained glass (aka Mondrian). Note (from Wikipedia): “Abstract art uses a visual language of form, color and line to create a composition which may exist with a degree of independence from visual references in the world”
Thanks for the theme suggestion, olavf!January 15, 2010 at 12:28 am #26149MorningbreathParticipant
here is a gallery of abstract photos, if people are looking for ideas, or don’t really have a clue as to what “abstract” means(like me)
and here is a definition:
In the photographic sense, an image that is conceived apart from concrete reality, generally emphasizing lines, colours and geometrical forms, and their relationship to one another.January 16, 2010 at 5:50 am #26150
Holy shiat Morningbreath, some of the photos in that link are really, really, really good. Humbling.
I was going to say that this style resonates with me. But I love all of this stuff.January 16, 2010 at 2:05 pm #26151
I agree those are cool photos, but a lot of them I woudln’t have thought “abstract” when seeing them. When I think abstract photography I think of stuff that doesn’t have much obvious “object”/”subject” to it. I’m gonna have to do more reading up on this one myself…January 16, 2010 at 5:40 pm #26152lokisbongParticipant
I agree those are cool photos, but a lot of them I woudln’t have thought “abstract” when seeing them. When I think abstract photography I think of stuff that doesn’t have much obvious “object”/”subject” to it. I’m gonna have to do more reading up on this one myself…
That was my impression also. like the blurry xmas lights in my “spiked nog” happy holidays entry.January 16, 2010 at 7:14 pm #26153
I agree with both of you. That was my opinion before doing a little googling. It seems many people out there use a broader definition.
IMO we have to use a broad definition and it will be interesting to see what our voters think. I have a few things in my files and have an idea or two. They are all subject-less.January 16, 2010 at 7:56 pm #26154olavfParticipant
Here’s some humbling examples of what a I had in mind when I suggested the theme:
which is almost ‘pure’ abstraction. But, I like the wikipedia definition of “abstract art”:
“Abstract art uses a visual language of form, color and line to create a composition which may exist with a degree of independence from visual references in the world”
Which to me means not taking a picture of a “thing”, but rather the shapes, textures, patterns, etc. that make up that thing, or collection of thingsJanuary 16, 2010 at 8:19 pm #26155lokisbongParticipant
That makes a lot of sense to me Olavf. This is why I do farktography. So I can learn new photography styles and techniques.January 16, 2010 at 9:23 pm #26156
The examples olavf linked to, and the wikipedia definition of abstract art are definitely more along the lines of what I think of when I think abstract photography. I think we shouldn’t go *too* broad because then it really isn’t abstract, but finding a line for what’s abstract vs what isn’t will almost certainly be impossible. Maybe something from the wikipedia entry can be added to the description to help clarify for people?January 16, 2010 at 9:58 pm #26157
…but finding a line for what’s abstract vs what isn’t will almost certainly be impossible.
That point was in my head. But I didn’t make it.:) I think we should aim at the wiki definition and accept a broad interpretation –> and then let the voters decide.
The examples that olavf provided speak to me. They say, “look at the incredibly cool shiat you can do with a camera and a nicely twisted imagination.”
I notice that many of the images I found are heavily photoshopped. Should we include a rule reminder? Or is the description getting too big already?January 16, 2010 at 10:08 pm #26158
Some of mine that I have used here –
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Smoke-11.jpg (crop the candle)
http://photos.imageevent.com/ulle17/fark/Marbles_9383.jpg (in the dark with a glow stick underneath)
Man. I started looking and just kept finding them. 🙂January 16, 2010 at 10:22 pm #26159KestranaParticipant
For once this is a contest where I will have far too many ideas rather than 1-2 good ones and a punt for #3.January 16, 2010 at 10:40 pm #26160olavfParticipant
Okay, back with a working keyboard attached to my laptop :/
Adding some form of the wiki definition to the description doesn’t sound like a bad idea at all. Looking through Google myself, it seems like there are a lot of things billed as ‘abstract’ that really don’t seem to fit any definition that I’ve seen.
I don’t know that adding a no photoshopping reminder is all that necessary though, since all the other normal rules apply too…
/U-man, I hear ya. I’ve been poking through my own stuff and there are a number of shots that I’d classify as abstract.January 22, 2010 at 11:07 am #26161LeicaLensParticipant
You should combine these two for Smoke on the Waaaaaaaaaaaattttttteeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
And fire on the ice (or was it “in the eyes”?)January 22, 2010 at 12:36 pm #26162
I think it was “A fire in the skies”. I can’t hear that song without thinking of pep band since we played it so much then…
Oh and U-man: Didn’t you use that candle pic in another contest already?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.