The whole idea of abstract photography is a bit strange really, as according to Wikkipedia: "Abstract art is now generally understood to mean art that does not depict objects in the natural world". How can a "straight" photograph ever depict objects that are not in the natural world?
Yes we can manipulate our images using digital (or traditional) techniques to render something different to what the film/sensor captured, but is producing the abstract possible with a camera alone? To be honest probably not!
Sometimes I like to use the term extract as I really can't put it better than Ansel Adams when he said:
I prefer the term extract over abstract, since I cannot change the optical realities but only manage them
Though when does a extract become an abstract image? Well my own personal definition of abstract is when you show an image to someone and the reaction you get is something along the lines of "I like that...what is it" or when you feel an overwhelming urge to put some explanation saying what it is when you display the picture.
The problem with abstract art/photography for a lot of viewers is in simply understanding it. Landscapes are easier on the viewer as they can appreciate the capture of a sense of place and time. Viewing a good landscape is essentially a passive activity and the same applies for most other areas of photography.
The abstract, however, makes demands on the viewer.."what is it?" or "do I like this?" and these demands can often put a lot of viewers off as they feel they don't understand the image or they are not sure how they are supposed to react to the image.
The trick with taking and understanding abstract work is to ask yourself "how do I feel about this?". Do the shapes and textures remind you of something? stir emotions? upset or even just amuse you. The same applies to taking them in the first place, as you look through the viewfinder what does the scene say to you?
If you find yourself just taking pictures "by the numbers" and not engaging with your subject then that is the time to ask yourself why you are taking the shot in the first place. But if you feel an emotion when you press the shutter release you are at least halfway to transmitting the emotion to the final print.
Belief; Canon 20D 17-85EFS(Click to view large)
As an example I give you this image taken last Friday whilst sticking to my new years resolution. this is a small detail from the Salvation Army headquarters between St.Paul's and the millennium bridge. its an interesting building and I have photographed it many times yet never been happy with the results.
This time whilst looking for detail I noticed this cross embedded in a canopy over the door-way. A small detail that I doubt anyone but me and the architect would know is there. I'm not religious but I do have a lot of time for the Salvation Army and as I viewed the simple symbol of the cross it seemed to me to sum up the power of a belief that had built the very building I was trying to capture.
Does it work as an image? Well that is up to you, the viewer, to decide.
This time whilst looking for detail I noticed this cross embedded in a canopy over the door-way. A small detail that I doubt anyone but me and the architect would know is there. I'm not religious but I do have a lot of time for the Salvation Army and as I viewed the simple symbol of the cross it seemed to me to sum up the power of a belief that had built the very building I was trying to capture.
Does it work as an image? Well that is up to you, the viewer, to decide.
12 comments:
An interesting take on Abstract photography Chris. I think your point on emotionally engaging and challenging the viewer to be very pertinent in this area of photography. Perhaps ballanced with taking care not to exclude them? Think the illustrated photo is a cracker also.
D
Indeed Dave, as ever photography is about what we exclude as much as what we include. Which goes for the subject & the viewer :)
would you describe painting with light as non-objective.
"non-objective", Sorry I had quite a poor education with regards to English.
I understand objective to mean
"not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts;"
which would make non-objective:
"influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts;"
kind of like subjective really.
So I think I would indeed say that is true of my abstract work.
Thanks for popping by.
Chris
no no what I mean is a image that isn't based one anything we see in the real world, like abstract paintings you know like Pollock’s action paintings or Mondrian’s paintings. When I say non-objected I wasn't necessarily thinking about the person feeling.
I love photography, I just seem to get a kick out of create new, interesting and unusual images; I particularly enjoy creating unrecognisable images which I would deem as abstract. Do you really think an image should emotionally stir you to be abstract? Because I’m trying to produce what I would call aesthetically pleasing photos, there’s no big meaning behind my images. I take a picture when I think it looks everything looks just right on the screen. There’s this great Ernst haas quote: "My theory of composition? Simple: do not release the shutter until everything in the viewfinder feels just right" please check out my new blog chris, see what you think? By the way that artbeast quote was by me, but i was just on another blog.
all the best
Lewis
Hi Lewis,
Off to subscribe to your blog now ;)
Do you really think an image should emotionally stir you to be abstract?
Well yes, that's kind of the point. if the image doesn't engage the artist emotionally then how can you expect it to engage anyone else?
Perhaps my example in this blog wasn't too clear in that it doesn't need to be some grand emotion, a simple "ohh I like that" will do.
[i]"do not release the shutter until everything in the viewfinder feels just right" [/i]
That's a good quote and is kind of what i was trying to say - not he uses "feels" not "looks" ;)
"If the image doesn't engage the artist emotionally then how can you expect it to engage anyone else?"
I don't totally agree with that Chris because the emotion that is stirred when the photographer presses the shutter could well be very personal to them and would not mean anything to anyone else.
"Oh I like that, will do" But that’s doesn't mean that much without the reasons why they don't. When I of an emotion I think of something greater and more meaningful than, I like it.
the emotion that is stirred when the photographer presses the shutter could well be very personal to them and would not mean anything to anyone else.
To me there seems little point in producing something that doesn't have any meaning for me personally. What others take from it is up to them and I can have little effect on them. My images need to talk to me first, then maybe they may talk to someone else.
If we divorce ours feelings from the process entirely then it becomes a purely mechanical process - which is not for me.
When I of an emotion I think of something greater and more meaningful than, I like it.
"I like it" is about as emotional as I get, I'm really very shallow ;)
Actually yeah when you take a photo to don't think of any thing much more than trying to get a composition you think works well visually. Every photo you take is personal to you because as its you doing it and the most important thing is whether you like it or not. You don't take a photo and instantly think well people won't like it, people can make their own opinion on it. I suppose "I like it" is a totally valid emotion actually Chris.
Changing the subject slightly do you think a abstract photo should be non-representational to be abstract Chris? I’ve been looking at abstract art comparing it to abstract photography.
What do u feel makes your "belief" photo abstract? Not being funny Chris, I’m just really intrigued in people views on the subject. I've got a load of new pics on my blog now; have a look see what you think. If you don't like them feel free to say so.
"but is producing the abstract possible with a camera alone?"
Hi everyone, I had to write when I spotted this comment in a Google search. Producing abstract photography is certainly possible 'in-camera' and without any form of photo-shopping. In my work I use only film camera's, the more manual the better and the only digital work I do on them is for reproduction online (i.e. neg scanning).
I was shocked by a student who wrote to me a few months age asking for the plugins that will get my effects ... lol ! I explained that we could collaborate on a piece to give an insight into my techniques and as soon as I mentioned growing crystals to shoot portraits through the student was off (probably looking for an easier way to get a degree);-))
Anyway, I love you work and would be very interested in working with you (if you could bare it) in the future. I have an idea for portraits using long distance video and handmade lenses that I'd like to try out ;-)
All the very best
Colin Hall ( www.artistnos.co.uk )
Wow interesting writeup, being an artist I've always appreciated photography specially abstract photography, well done and thanks for sharing.
Post a Comment