Post your abstracts

[ljsegil]

Just one more as I am unable to critique my own stuff well enough to winnow the wheat from the chaff (and two small format digital that don't belong but I think are kind of cool and want to put up for the forum in violation of the rules and norms of our society (and yes, I was sort of an SDS participant in my youth, so please forgive my further, continuing transgressions)).
Larry

[nathanm]

[andress007]

SWIFT & Son lens '1860

[jnantz]

....

[Bruce M. Herman]

Here are some abstracts from the southwest.

1. Water laid sand
2. bush in sand dune
3. Log in an adobe wall

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Here are some abstracts from the southwest.

1. Water laid sand
2. bush in sand dune
3. Log in an adobe wall

Bruce I really like that first one. Look like you took it on Mars. Nice work.

Jim

[D. Bryant]

This thread brings up a question I have whenever I see work described as "abstract". I'm wondering what that label means to different people. For me, if the subject is easily identified as to what it is (e.g. Miguels' egg), it's not an abstract. The image Don posted definitely is. Just my opinion...

Perhaps the phrase 'Abstract Expressionism' should be used to classify the type of work like Donald's and others whose images do not visually describe an identifiable or recognizable object. In other words a style of photography that produce a non representation image which expresses or describes an idea or emotion thought or felt by the photographer.

Or these types of photos could be said to be examples of visual thinking; thoughts that cannot be written about or verbalized by the photographer, visual perceptions that have been captured with a visual media.

I forgot who wrote this but someone once remarked that there are only two types of photographs, "What is it?" or "Who is it?".

Don Bryant

[Miguel Coquis]

Hi,
Yes. If you can only see "eggs", thats what you have seen !
It all depends with which eyes one sees when seeing abstracts.
There where eggs there, when I took the picture...
That I can not help.
Normally, I felt light and what it offers to me !!!!
Then just follow...
Good luck.

Perhaps the phrase 'Abstract Expressionism' should be used to classify the type of work like Donald's and others whose images do not visually describe an identifiable or recognizable object. In other words a style of photography that produce a non representation image which expresses or describes an idea or emotion thought or felt by the photographer.

Or these types of photos could be said to be examples of visual thinking; thoughts that cannot be written about or verbalized by the photographer, visual perceptions that have been captured with a visual media.

I forgot who wrote this but someone once remarked that there are only two types of photographs, "What is it?" or "Who is it?".

Don Bryant

[Miguel Coquis]

This thread brings up a question I have whenever I see work described as "abstract". I'm wondering what that label means to different people. For me, if the subject is easily identified as to what it is (e.g. Miguels' egg), it's not an abstract. The image Don posted definitely is. Just my opinion...

Kouklis,
Eggs are not mine and there is none description, at all. Only a visual.
No property syndrome. I am photographer not a farmer.
As I say before some where else: eggs is what you see !
How come can you see something else ?
"abstract" can not exist alone, it needs ones acceptation.
Ease your mind and something else can probably appears....

[jnantz]

miquel

as beautiful as your egg image is ( and i like it! )
i think images like that are more "conceptual" than "abstract"
i always understood abstraction to be something totally different
than conceptualism, but perhaps they are both one in the same
and bring us that much closer to the universal truth we all search for.

i look forward to the next one!

john