Abstract/semi-abstract photography and you

[invisible]

What place do abstracts/semi-abstracts have in your photography? Do you shoot them often? Why do you think abstract/semi-abstract photography is not very popular?

[TPF Sponsor]

[Bifurcator]

I think one of the best abstract photographers here is Chiller. I like allot of his stuff. I stab at it sometimes.

Like the last shot in this series: http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=137220

[LaFoto]

I take them way too seldom, think I should challenge myself a lot more to take photos of the kind, and really like them, mostly so if they are very "simple" in their composition (few elements only). I like to look at those taken by others, like yours, Federico!

[paranoidandroid13]

I try to take abstract pictures as much as I can. When it seems like every other picture in the world has been taken, abstract photos stand out. It is my opinion that no two abstract photos (or any piece of abstract art) can ever be duplicated exactly. For me, it is very freeing to be able to create something completely unique to me. Not that taking a "non-abstract" photo is not unique, but there is just something liberating about breaking the traditional rules of photography and creating something unique... Anyone else feel the same?

[abraxas]

What place do abstracts/semi-abstracts have in your photography? Do you shoot them often? Why do you think abstract/semi-abstract photography is not very popular?

I prefer abstracts/alternatives over traditional/conventional.

I think that, if done effectively, it takes people where they do not want to go or understand.

[invisible]

I like to look at those taken by others, like yours, Federico!

LOL, I think I only have a grand total of five or six semi-abstract keepers under my belt!

I hear what you guys are saying, but... why do people not create more abstract/semi-abstract stuff with their cameras? For instance, if a new sub-forum for abstract photography were created here, we would likely get just a handful of threads per month.

In my (limited) personal experience, I think shooting abstract has helped me enormously with composition. When you shoot abstract you're basically framing raw lines and shapes; you get to experiment with the rule of thirds and such, pushing it to the extreme or breaking it. In turn, your brain becomes used to frame everything in terms of lines and shapes (not objects), whether you're shooting a landscape, a portrait, a flower in macro, etc. (Again, this is just my personal experience.)

I've also found that abstract is the way to go when you visit a place that doesn't live up to your expectations in terms of of "shootable" subjects. Dull places force you to be creative and find things to shoot where there's nothing "obvious" to shoot.

[abraxas]

I think most photographers want to stick with what is conventional because it is conventional- the accepted norm. I've become more interested in alternatives and expression because convention has become increasingly boring to me--in my case landscapes. I still enjoy shooting them, and even enjoy looking at others work, but, I believe I'm becoming jaded by various levels of mediocrity- There are countless photographers that produce high quality work. So many in fact, that looking at this work becomes numbing, and I begin to wonder what it's all about? Sometimes there just doesn't seem to be any difference.

I suppose I still like to pull a pretty landscape off when I can. I'm sure I'll keep trying to get better also. If I become proficient, I'll probably feel I've just reached a different level of more of the same. Sometimes I think that the only way to go, the only way to produce something unique to me is to express things I feel and imagine I see that are fleeting and variable. To try to evoke that in others that are willing to let that into themselves and possibly identify what an image does inside of them.

[Bifurcator]

I think most photographers want to stick with what is conventional...

I want do more abstract stuff but it more often then not calls for contrivance, forethought, and what boils down to allot of work. Thus it's not copacetic with my usual spontaneous style. I wonder too how many others (hobbyists at least) feel the same.

[Mike_E]

And a big 10 points to Bifurcator for the gratuitous use of the word "Copacetic"!

[Bifurcator]

hehe...

When I was ~16 I used to use copacetic and bodacious in just about every sentence. I'm ancient... what can I say.

[Peter_pan91]

If done well it can be truly amazing, if done well..

[Brian Austin]

I don't really get into abstracts at all. Admittedly, I'm more conventional in that respect. I prefer Van Gogh and Rembrandt over Picasso.

I use photography to tell a story or take viewers where they haven't gone. Landscapes, artistic/fine art nudes, captures of candid private moments, etc., all transport people to places they dream about. Abstracts don't really do that, imo.

[Bifurcator]

I think a good abstract does that in a deeper more profound way. But it relies more on the person's intellect and their mind's eye than on the visual communication medium. For me the abstract impresses those "dream about places I'm never been to" in a more permanent and natural way. I remember the feelings and dreams they leave me with (probably because they are actually my own) for a much longer time. Like of all the 1000's of Images I've viewed since being here I can call up a visual remembrance of the more abstract ones but almost can't recall at all the "very realistic conventional" ones.

Anyway, that's how I work... Hehehe "The Bifurcator Machine".

[Brian Austin]

Like of all the 1000's of Images I've viewed since being here I can call up a visual remembrance of the more abstract ones but almost can't recall at all the "very realistic conventional" ones.

So it's down to personal perception...because I can't recall a single abstract but could sketch out many of my favorite "conventional" viewed images.

[photographyaddict]

i do them all the time but for personal pleasure. not everybody 'gets' it so it doesn't get sold.