The Abstract/Minimalist Thread !

[pez]

 

[mishele]

 

[ronlane]

Not sure I understand abstract/minimalist. Would this qualify?

 

[mishele]

 

[pez]

mishele, you must live in some sort of fascinating museum, or your home is filled with really interesting curios...

 

[sleist]

 

[sm4him]

 

[sm4him]

Not sure I understand abstract/minimalist. Would this qualify?

Ron--I like your image, and personally, I think in this particular thread, if you want to include it, it qualifies.
But in a more precise sense, I wouldn't call it either minimalism or abstract. It's definitely not abstract, as the subject is clearly identifiable as bubbles. An abstract image typically doesn't depict a person, place or thing; instead, the focus is on color, texture, shape, form, or lines.
It's not really minimalism either. Minimalism defined is "A school of abstract painting and sculpture that emphasizes extreme simplification of form, as by the use of basic shapes and monochromatic palettes of primary colors, objectivity, and anonymity of style." For instance, in your photo, if you had a single bubble (or a very small group of bubbles together in one spot of the photo) with that nice, blurred background, it would be minimalist.

 

[ronlane]

Not sure I understand abstract/minimalist. Would this qualify?

Ron--I like your image, and personally, I think in this particular thread, if you want to include it, it qualifies.
But in a more precise sense, I wouldn't call it either minimalism or abstract. It's definitely not abstract, as the subject is clearly identifiable as bubbles. An abstract image typically doesn't depict a person, place or thing; instead, the focus is on color, texture, shape, form, or lines.
It's not really minimalism either. Minimalism defined is "A school of abstract painting and sculpture that emphasizes extreme simplification of form, as by the use of basic shapes and monochromatic palettes of primary colors, objectivity, and anonymity of style." For instance, in your photo, if you had a single bubble (or a very small group of bubbles together in one spot of the photo) with that nice, blurred background, it would be minimalist.

Thank you Sharon. That gives me a better understanding of it.

 

[sleist]

Not sure I understand abstract/minimalist. Would this qualify?

Ron--I like your image, and personally, I think in this particular thread, if you want to include it, it qualifies.
But in a more precise sense, I wouldn't call it either minimalism or abstract. It's definitely not abstract, as the subject is clearly identifiable as bubbles. An abstract image typically doesn't depict a person, place or thing; instead, the focus is on color, texture, shape, form, or lines.
It's not really minimalism either. Minimalism defined is "A school of abstract painting and sculpture that emphasizes extreme simplification of form, as by the use of basic shapes and monochromatic palettes of primary colors, objectivity, and anonymity of style." For instance, in your photo, if you had a single bubble (or a very small group of bubbles together in one spot of the photo) with that nice, blurred background, it would be minimalist.

I would mostly agree with this I think. But I also think there is a pretty wide margin for error as to what does or does not fit the definition.
I've questioned some of my own contributions from time to time. In the end I just figure it might be best to let others decide for themselves.

 

[mishele]

 

[sm4him]

Not sure I understand abstract/minimalist. Would this qualify?

Ron--I like your image, and personally, I think in this particular thread, if you want to include it, it qualifies.
But in a more precise sense, I wouldn't call it either minimalism or abstract. It's definitely not abstract, as the subject is clearly identifiable as bubbles. An abstract image typically doesn't depict a person, place or thing; instead, the focus is on color, texture, shape, form, or lines.
It's not really minimalism either. Minimalism defined is "A school of abstract painting and sculpture that emphasizes extreme simplification of form, as by the use of basic shapes and monochromatic palettes of primary colors, objectivity, and anonymity of style." For instance, in your photo, if you had a single bubble (or a very small group of bubbles together in one spot of the photo) with that nice, blurred background, it would be minimalist.

I would mostly agree with this I think. But I also think there is a pretty wide margin for error as to what does or does not fit the definition.
I've questioned some of my own contributions from time to time. In the end I just figure it might be best to let others decide for themselves.

I agree completely. My impression was that Ron was saying he didn't have a clue what abstract and minimalism really ARE--so that was my attempt to give him a guideline to help him (and others) decide for themselves whether their photo is abstract or minimalism.

 

[limr]

 

[mishele]

 

[mishele]