Abtract images

[Donald]

This fits into the 'Architecture' category, I think.

I was looking at a lesson on composition on lynda.com and one of the exercises was to look to create at 4/5 abstract images within your house, all within an hour. Images that could not be identified as whatever (chair, table, window, ornament, etc), but were purely abstract. I found it a fascinating exercise in terms of looking and composing. This was so left-field for me.

I finished two images.

I have no idea as to whether they stand up as in any way decent images. I like them, which is one measurement, but I am keen to hear from people who are more aware of and work with abstract images. Like I say, this was so outwith my comfort zone that I have nothing on to which to base an opinion.

So anything you have to say from they're rubbish to 'wow' (hopefully a bit more detailed critique), will be welcomed.

[ccphoto]

For me, they're both too "soft" to hold my attention past the initial glimpse.

[Manfred M]

I glad to see you pushing that side of photography, Donald.

Most people find that abstract photography is the most difficult photographic genre to do well. We need to use the same visual techniques as in non-abstract photographs to engage and guide the viewer's eyes through the image, without the ability to use the visual cues that we have when shooting non-abstract scenes. This also creates challenges to critique abstract works that have been submitted for photographic competitions.

I've seen some debates in the abstract photography community as to "what is abstract?". Some abstract photographers feel that no element in an abstract image should be identifiable, as they are in your images, to be considered "abstract". I personally find that to be a bit over the top as I have always felt that a good image is just that and all these silly rules some people apply are generally not useful.

[billtils]

... Images that could not be identified as whatever ...

They are identifiable Donald, and, picking up on Chris's point, was there a reason why they are soft? I think that the first (venetian blind) could have had more impact if sharp and contrasty. Same for the second, but take away the chair and go for hard lines and angles.

[Donald]

They are identifiable Donald, and, picking up on Chris's point, was there a reason why they are soft? I think that the first (venetian blind) could have had more impact if sharp and contrasty. Same for the second, but take away the chair and go for hard lines and angles.

You say they're identfiable. Then you say that the first one is a venetian blind. No it's not. It's a radiator and the image is rotated 90 degrees. And the second one is not a chair.

I note the comments about them being soft and I agree with that. Thanks for commenting.

[billtils]

Touché (or even Three-ché as Victor Borge might have put it ).

[jllaurado]

I find them interesting, mainly the second one due the balanced presence of geometric figures made of light and shadow (is that an aisle as seen from above?), i also agree on the softness, but that might also be a creative decision.

[JBW]

In number two the large white area is hard on the eyes. Could you give it a dramatic sky treatment that would compliment the large brown area to the left of it?

[tao2]

Hi Donald,

A serendipitous thread. Been away from the forums for nearly a year now, due to an illness. Ah've only been shooting abstracts at home or the very near proximity. Got yer first shot but the second?. Initially thought it was a very clean bin recess (knowing where ye live, ye must paint yer bins at least once a month ... Is it an unused ,filled-in fireplace? Ah like the second one much better than the first. Ah think with the first, ye couldha gone along the lines of my shadow blind one. Mebbe only a partial closure as the sun sets (with the blur - from the other side of the room). Or kneeling down or up a coupla steps.

Abstract? It's what YOU (plural) want it tae be, what YOU (plural) see. Don't let the jobsworths and the pseudo-talking heads tell ye what it should be. Here's a couple of mine (been worked on) but ah intended them that way ...or as near as dammit!

[JBW]

welcome back to better health and the forum

[Manfred M]

Welcome back and I hope your health is back to where you can do the things you want to. Having had health problems a few years back, it put a major restriction on my photographic work. Trying to hold a camera while on crutches is something I found to be extremely challenging.

You can't fool me. Some of us old guys have no problems recognizing the last image.

[Donald]

Boab - It's great to see you posting again. Keep on getting fitter and feeling better.

Thanks for your comments. The second one is indeed the recess for the fire. The object at the bottom left is the top of the woodburning stove.

Your images show such a well developed vision and seeing what is possible. I get annoyed with myself that I cannot 'see' what is possible and end up with a 'straight' image. I think I have a lack of imagination!

Anyway, I must go and wash the bins.

[billtils]

Great to see you well enough to post here again - and as ever, enjoyed your imaginative images.

[ccphoto]

Boab - It's great to see you posting again. Keep on getting fitter and feeling better.

Thanks for your comments. The second one is indeed the recess for the fire. The object at the bottom left is the top of the woodburning stove.

Your images show such a well developed vision and seeing what is possible. I get annoyed with myself that I cannot 'see' what is possible and end up with a 'straight' image. I think I have a lack of imagination!

Anyway, I must go and wash the bins.

Not that it is bad, nor that it cannot be "changed," but you tend to be a very linear image maker in a straight forward way that is as good as the best abstract is good...don't let that part of your mind's eye ever change.