ABSTRACT Photography--Definition and Examples

[canonrebel]

Can someone explain to me what abstract photography is?
What is the definition?
Do you have any examples?

ThanX
The Rebel

[markc]

Abstract tends to be more about shape and form, and sometimes texture and color, than about subject matter.

I don't have any examples myself to show.

[markc]

Here are some abstracts.

[danalec99]

-How do we communicate with an abstract art (be it photography or painting)?
-How did that art form evolve and why?

[canonrebel]

Quote: Originally Posted by markc

Abstract tends to be more about shape and form, and sometimes texture and color, than about subject matter.

I don't have any examples myself to show.

Hi markc,
Then, was the brown bag an example of abstract afterall? The brown bag submission still bothers me, 'cause I couldn't relate to it and everyone else did. I've returned to that thread many times and I just do not get it. I'm worried that something is amiss with my perception

[markc]

Quote: Originally Posted by canonrebel

Hi markc,
Then, was the brown bag an example of abstract afterall? The brown bag submission still bothers me, 'cause I couldn't relate to it and everyone else did. I've returned to that thread many times and I just do not get it. I'm worried that something is amiss with my perception

I missed that thread, but I just took a look. Yeah, I personally would consider it an abstract. It's not all-out, as it is still readily identifiable, but it's still more about line, form, texture, color... There isn't really a story there. At least not one that is readily obvious as being intentional.

I find it visually pleasing, but my eye doesn't linger. Don't worry about your perception. Abstract isn't everyone's bag. Even if you are the only person to like something, or the only person to not, that doesn't make you wrong.

It's rare for an abstract to do more for me than to have me think, "that's nice". That's why flower pics don't usually do much for me. They might be recognizable as flowers, but the image really is about color, form, and etc, so I see them as abstract. My prefered viewing tends to lean towards the photojournalistic style, like Robert Frank, Gene Smith, and Henri Cartier-Bresson. Others might see their work as just some people standing around or what-have-you.

[markc]

Quote: Originally Posted by danalec99

-How do we communicate with an abstract art (be it photography or painting)?
-How did that art form evolve and why?

I can't answer either one, really. I have a hard time reading abstracts as more than being pretty, so I tend not to get any communication from them. It's a really good question, and one that I haven't considered consciously before. I'll have to think on that.

[danalec99]

Quote: Originally Posted by canonrebel

Quote: Originally Posted by markc

Abstract tends to be more about shape and form, and sometimes texture and color, than about subject matter.

I don't have any examples myself to show.

Hi markc,
Then, was the brown bag an example of abstract afterall? The brown bag submission still bothers me, 'cause I couldn't relate to it and everyone else did. I've returned to that thread many times and I just do not get it. I'm worried that something is amiss with my perception

canonrebel, when I shot that brownbag, I was never like, "okay, let me do an abstract art". It was a plain simple bag of whatever. It was lying on my nightstand and I liked the shadows, hues, glow that it created since it was placed right near a bed lamp. It was the form (that shadow, lighting)that caught my attention. I do not think I would have shot that bag during the day time.
End of story!

I'm on the same page as you are. I do not know how to communicate with an abstract art which I had already mentioned. But that should not make us uncomfortable. But I would really want to know about that art form which was why I raised that query in my prev post!

[ksmattfish]

Here's the dictionary definition:

"Having an intellectual and affective artistic content that depends solely on intrinsic form rather than on narrative content or pictorial representation."

And here are a few of my abstracts, more on my website.



I call this one Grendel, because sometimes I can see a monster in it, but it's mostly about color, and just a little texture from the grain. Taken on 35mm Konica 3200 exposed at 800.




This can be identified as some sort of concrete construction, but for me it isn't about the three dimensional form as much as the two dimensional pattern of light and dark. Sometimes I display it hung horizontally, which confuses the viewer even more.

[Sharkbait]

Would you consider this to be abstract? Personally I think it's borderline. It's recognizable, but it's not done in a way that it's easily recognizable for what the object is...

[Sharkbait]

Another of mine that I would consider abstract. Feel free to disagree.

[markc]

Nice stuff, Matt and John.

I would consider those abstract, even if they are of recognizable objects, because the images are more about form than anything else. They aren't meant to represent the object itself, and there is no narative. If they were of the CD sitting on the table, or the ball in the grass, that would be different.

[canonrebel]

Quote:

ABSTRACT: Here's the dictionary definition:

"Having an intellectual and affective artistic content that depends solely on intrinsic form rather than on narrative content or pictorial representation."

Isn't it wonderful how far a little knowledge can take one.LOL. Now that I can difine my expectations using my newly acquired knowlege of abstract, my world of viewing pleasure has been expanded. When I viewed the brownbag again, I was surpprised to realise (since my lesson in abstract) that I was relating to the brownbag

ThanX for the lesson, folks.

Rebel

[danalec99]

But why do we shoot abstract pictures?

[oriecat]

Same reason you shoot any other picture? :? because there is an image you want to capture?