Abstract at a bar

[ryanforster]

Any comments/critique please. I like it but maybe it just appeals to my taste.

 

[binga63]

mmmmmmmm.... its more like a candid to me than an abstract.......

 

[StoneNYC]

mmmmmmmm.... its more like a candid to me than an abstract.......

Agreed, not to be harsh but there's no interesting focus point, exposure is too low, looks like a cell phone image :/ sorry not trying to be mean.


~Stone

The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Frequency]

The thing is that the viewers don't get what you visualized; the emotional element has to be transformed to some visually appealing content for an abstract to be successful
Regards

 

[AgentDrex]

An abstract photo is such that it doesn't show what the viewer what it is but instead allows the viewer to imagine what it could be. In this photo, one can clearly see this is a bar scene.

However, I must say, I do like this. I like how you got the money exchange at the point of lights so that we see that first and then notice that the bartender is busy doing something else showing that this is a busy place. You have compressed a lot of the scene into a small area which also lends itself to showing the busy nature of the bar. I also like the reflection as it draws the framing further down away from the top so more of the photo is showing something about the bar (in this case the straws). I like how you have a body and an arm as the leading line towards the hand holding money waiting to be served.

Saying all that however, I don't see how this is abstract. Perhaps reading this following article will shed some light for you:

Abstract Expressionism

 

[Mully]

The thing is that the viewers don't get what you visualized; the emotional element has to be transformed to some visually appealing content for an abstract to be successful
Regards

Transcendental photography is not practiced in the US

 

[sm4him]

Whoa. Sorry for misusing the term abstract. Should I pick some other more pretentious name instead? I don't believe that abstract has to be defined by anyone's criteria, I think it's more of a case of whether it's abstract from my personal view of photography. But thanks for the critique, all noted. Cheers.

Whoa indeed. Get defensive much?
No, you should not pick a more pretentious name for it, just a more accurate one. This is not an abstract, and yes, there actually ARE some "criteria" that help define what is, or isn't, an abstract. There are gray areas in the interpretation of those, certainly, but there is simply NOTHING about this that is abstract. Yes, *you* can call it an abstract from your "personal view of photography." But it's not, anymore than deciding to call a fish a duck MAKES it a duck. It's still a fish, no matter what you personally decide to call it.

Anyway--this IS an interesting shot and I rather like it.

 

[pic_chick]

abstract
1. thought of APART from concrete realities, specific objects, or actual instances: an abstract idea.

2. expressing a quality or characteristic APART from any specific object or instance, as justice, poverty, and speed.

3. theoretical; not applied or practical: abstract science.

4. difficult to understand; abstruse: abstract speculations.

5. Fine Arts. a. of or pertaining to the formal aspect of art, emphasizing lines, colors, generalized or geometrical forms, etc., especially with reference to their relationship to one another.

Your photo in none of these things and being told your using the term wrong is correct. As for the photo I don't really like it and I can't decide why maybe it is all the cut off heads I don't know it feels uncomfortable.