I haven't done any peppers (or other vegetables) either. I've done some flower portraits. A lot of photographers have. Doesn't mean I can't bring my own vision of them forward. Most everything has been done before. That fact isn't disqualifying. I enjoyed doing them and like what I did. Other's may not think much of them. That's okay.not me
but i think there is a difference between what you just said and what the OP said ( i think ? )I haven't done any peppers (or other vegetables) either. I've done some flower portraits. A lot of photographers have. Doesn't mean I can't bring my own vision of them forward. Most everything has been done before. That fact isn't disqualifying. I enjoyed doing them and like what I did. Other's may not think much of them. That's okay.
I used 'pretty' on purpose -- to differentuate it from the exploration of beauty. It is one of the things that seperate the artists from those who do not consider themselves to be artists.pigeon holes ! ... kittens and sunsets !
but vaughn isn't 99% of photography, or things that pass as "art photography" beauty shots if not of the landscape, people or things ?
that is the intent of the photographer to take these photographs and i am exchanging pretty for beauty cause its like a cute puppy or kitten
the exploration of beauty
I haven't done any peppers (or other vegetables) either. I've done some flower portraits. A lot of photographers have. Doesn't mean I can't bring my own vision of them forward. Most everything has been done before. That fact isn't disqualifying. I enjoyed doing them and like what I did. Other's may not think much of them. That's okay.
It is the exploration of beauty that is art -- not beauty itself.Not sure I'd agree that beauty defines art...unless we accept space cadet "nothing really matters" notions of art.
I’ve photographed my daughter, taking the idea like Steichen photographed Therese and Isadora Duncan...Your "mimic" vs "create" point is interesting and seems fundamental. How many of us have, like me, photographed bell peppers with Weston in mind?
Not sure I'd agree that beauty defines art...unless we accept space cadet "nothing really matters" notions of art.
Well ‘pretty’ might be what one person sees in a redwood grove but I am reminded that our lives are short, and I feel all the urgency to enjoy it while we have it.I used 'pretty' on purpose -- to differentuate it from the exploration of beauty. It is one of the things that seperate the artists from those who do not consider themselves to be artists.
"Abstract" has come to mean "accidental results, limited intentions" too commonly.
What do you think?
Do you have an example or two to provide?
Here are a couple I had in mind.
https://www.moma.org/collection/works/108191
http://www.photographydealers.com/artists/paul-caponigro/
Here are a couple I had in mind.
Thank you to the many adults who have avoided shallow argument, attacks, and "opinions", making interesting cases for their individual differing perspectives.
couldn't agree more with both statements .. its typical of people who can't do things to make insulting commentsI think your thesis is tiresome and easy, in the same camp as the worn out "my kid could have painted that" insults.
They're fully photographic, not mere light sensitive materials and lenses.
exactly!You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm not sure the entire category of "abstract photos" can be described up with one statement.
Well, I guess I was right after all. And with respect to Minor White, he usually talked in terms of equivalents rather than abstracts anyway, focusing on what an image conveyed rather than trying to simply describe it. I am pretty sure that he felt that if the only thing you could say about an image was that is was an [insert genre here], the image was either unsuccessful, or you hadn't given it much thought or were inarticulate. Of course, you got extra points if you could somehow relate it to Zen Buddhism.Bill's two examples are direct, literal renditions of reality that we can recognize without photography. I don't think they're "abstracts", but that becomes a matter of semantics.
Exactly -- and if one can put that sense of age (both the long and the short) into the image of the redwoods, then IMO, one has created beauty rather than something that is just pretty...and nice.Well ‘pretty’ might be what one person sees in a redwood grove but I am reminded that our lives are short, and I feel all the urgency to enjoy it while we have it.
Perhaps abstract is also the natural realm of photography-based digital art.JTK, I'm with you on this one.. Someone once said that "every photograph should have a referent" , and I agree. Abstract? Try water colors, oils or acrylic. At any rate, William de Kooning and hundreds of others have done it already, and better.
Thank you to the many adults who have avoided shallow argument, attacks, and "opinions", making interesting cases for their individual differing perspectives.
With an abstract, it is not that the image does not have a referent, it is that the viewer brings the referent to the image. See, equivalent.JTK, I'm with you on this one.. Someone once said that "every photograph should have a referent" , and I agree. Abstract? Try water colors, oils or acrylic. At any rate, William de Kooning and hundreds of others have done it already, and better.
JTK, I'm with you on this one.. Someone once said that "every photograph should have a referent" , and I agree. Abstract? Try water colors, oils or acrylic. At any rate, William de Kooning and hundreds of others have done it already, and better.
You're welcome.
I think you just want to argue with people, and posting your "tiresome.....wrong medium, too easy" thesis on a sub forum called "Abstract" where people share their abstract photography is a good place to start the arguing and divide people.
Some of us think it's rude, and your abrasive behavior in this thread including the super sized and bold text thank-you to the adults on the forum does nothing to diminish that opinion. Tuning out now.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?