Reading mode: Light Dark

>>>> Challenge 72: Found Abstracts <<<<

Go to last post
that I should crop 228 pixels from the bottom of the pic? Hummm, I have to admit, it does enhance the optical illusion. BTW, it is upside down.

I guess its the 'terseness' that bugged me. Spot on, tho, eh? OK, I did the crop. What do you think?

Warm fuzzies,
--
-mikey

'The chief enemy of creativity is good taste' --Pablo Picasso

 
...I am going in an entirely different direction.

The surrounds count also...your blond wood floors as well as that great window cut in, work perfectly with white. Your place seemed architecturally clean...which also lends itself to white.

White is acutally my preferred color...but but for this house with all of it's old and interesting lines....I think that tomorrow I'll start laying down yellow...lol... with oil based, high gloss white bannister hand rail, and landing details. Should be a nice and pleasing contrast.

I'm still not sold on a blue bedroom...the ceiling is white, part of one wall is yellow, the other bayou blue and another something called Handsome Hue, a much deeper blue.

People at Home Depot are laughing everytime I walk in now announcing....I want color with Huevos...lol...none of this pastel foo-foo.

(actually I use a dirty word for eggs that makes people laugh louder)

Hell, I can always paint it again.

Best Wishes,

Traveller
 
...surrealism.

Hey, Michael, said any amount of PP was fine...found and abstract...well, I have the base photo, but today I've been photographing people's eyeballs ...we'll see what happens.

Oh, and besides painting....I've got actual work to do...damn!

Later, and

Best Wishes,

Traveller
 
Hey guys,

Sorry I've been away for so long. Started a new job and have been cracking the books and burning some midnight oil to get myself up to speed on some different tech architectures than I'm not used to. Fiber SAN fabrics and NAS heads were a "I'll get to that later" thing until last week.

I've got 3 in Eligible, and I'd consider it just spiffariffic if anyone's got the time to rip me a new one on what is and isn't abstract. (calling Miss Rysher, come in Miss Rysher...) In al seriousness, I'd love some feedback, positive or negative, from anyone who's got the time.

On a side note, I've got to say, my first thought upon seeing the new challenge topic was "somewhere, a certain Mr. Hamilton is preparing to lay down the smack". I have yet to see said smack, and I want to see it. And as long as I'm being demanding, I think I want some magesta with my smack.

jb

--

--Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population.
--Albert Einstein
 
I happen to have done my commenting in reverse order. I just did. No reason. I'm glad I did though. Please read them from last to first as well. :)

Lonnit

--
Please visit my gallery at http://pbase.com/lonnit

and offer your comments. Tell me what you like and what you don't, and why. I welcome all opinions. :)

 
Wow, I was expecting much worse. You've softened in my absence. ;)

As for the backdrop in Walk This Way, I agree that it's blah. I thought about blowing it out to all white, but I wasn't sure how far to go with the photoshopping, as these are supposed to be "found" images. Did I take it too literally?

For the dead space in Watcher in the Wood, I don't know why I added so much. I sat for about 30 minutes trying to crop it a whole bunch of different ways, and the way you see it was the one that was most appealing to me. There's something about the positioning of the eye that requires a bunch of real estate on the right. I dunno why, it's just a feeling, and I went with my gut. Plus, the blurry woodgrain on the right was creamy, and the watcher's face is so harsh, I thought it had a nice dichotomy to it.

As for Simplicity of Line, that was the shot that got me started. Lying head down down a staircase at sunset got the wife's eyebrows up. I did like how it turned out, though. I did a little cloning since the other option, painting the nicked up bits, wasn't an option at the moment. ;)

Thanks again, you've made my day,
jb

--

--Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population.
--Albert Einstein
 
Judi,

I did the additional compression on "Sea of Tranquility" and "Pipes". It was actually very easy. What program are you using to generate your jpegs? I am using PS CS2. I just grabbed your images from PBase, saved as jpeg (no need to use "save for web") and saved the images at jpeg level 7, which is pretty respectable in my experience (but you'd already saced them as jpegs once). Both are now just below the 153,600 byte limit.

Of note is that I make sure all the boxes to save previews or icons are unchecked. The only checked box is the one to save an ICC profile with the image.

If you have questions about all this, just ask. If you aren't using PS CS2 as I am, no doubt someone out there who participates in the challenges is using exactly the same software as you are using.

Cheers,

Michael
--

Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/mtpuff
 
...thanks for initiating this conversation. I'm hoping plenty o'folks might chime in.

I've got lots of thoughts on this subject which are still settling into something I hope will be firmer than jello at the conclusion of this challenge. I suppose that's one of the main reasons I haven't jumped into commets as yet. I'm still absorbing all of the info I can find on abstracts.

I'll try to write up my response tomorrow, but for tonight I'm just plain exhausted with pressing family matters. However, I wanted to jot off a quick reply tonight to say thanks for kicking off a discussion.

Michael
--

Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/mtpuff
 
Michael, I was actually using ACDSee. I have PCS2 but still don't know how to use it except for the obvious functions (levels, curves, sharpnes etc) and the "help" isn't always very helpful. I don't even know where the option is to save at various Jpeg levels, but when I get home I will certainly check it out (I know I most sound like a real dork). Anyway, thanks.
Judi
 
...abstract, is as much Abstract as the more common, more easily recognized, non-represenative Abastract. As your linked article notes:

*********

Others disagree with these afore-mentioned viewpoints. They believe that abstract photographs are not merely close-ups of patterns and shapes, as seen through a lens. These people do see the validity in the process of photographing subjects out of their usual context and in offering new interpretations of the familiar. They understand the meaning of separating a specific intangible element of an object and presenting it in its “meta concept”. (For example, “red” as a 'pure' concept, not just as part of an object.)

But they believe that these exercises don’t necessarily make the resultant images “abstract.” (This is because they equate “abstract art” with its subset, non-representational -- or non-objective -- art.) So they recognize the possibility of “semi-abstract” art, images in which the artist presents a real, recognizable form in an “abstract” composition.

For them, the “path to abstraction" begins with images that capture recognizable subject matter in an unusual way. It continues through non-objective abstract photographs that derive their imagery from a non-recognizable subject. (Some would argue that the road goes even further than that: to works that eliminate the use of the camera altogether.)

******

For me, Meta Representational is an Abstract from the Whole...which is known, but not seen in the image. It is this aspect of the question, (unseen but known and subscounsciously asssumed to be!) that I feel the writer could have made clearer.

Best Wishes,

Traveller
 
Jason said:
Wow, I was expecting much worse. You've softened in my absence. ;)
Click to expand...
Hmmmm.... thanks??? LOL!
Jason198448 said:
As for the backdrop in Walk This Way, I agree that it's blah. I
thought about blowing it out to all white, but I wasn't sure how
far to go with the photoshopping, as these are supposed to be
"found" images. Did I take it too literally?
Click to expand...
The images have to be found, not the editing. ;)
Jason198448 said:
For the dead space in Watcher in the Wood, I don't know why I added
so much. I sat for about 30 minutes trying to crop it a whole
bunch of different ways, and the way you see it was the one that
was most appealing to me. There's something about the positioning
of the eye that requires a bunch of real estate on the right. I
dunno why, it's just a feeling, and I went with my gut. Plus, the
blurry woodgrain on the right was creamy, and the watcher's face is
so harsh, I thought it had a nice dichotomy to it.
Click to expand...
You could be right. I imagined several different ways of cropping it until I settled on the suggested one. It very well could be that once it's actually done that it does not work. On the rare occasion when I end up with pix where I can't find a decent crop, I usually decide the image just isn't working and I trash it. Not that you should. It works, but it might leave some people wondering, "why all the excess real estate?". So, skru 'em if they don't like it. LOL!
Jason198448 said:
As for Simplicity of Line, that was the shot that got me started.
Lying head down down a staircase at sunset got the wife's eyebrows
up. I did like how it turned out, though. I did a little cloning
since the other option, painting the nicked up bits, wasn't an
option at the moment. ;)
Click to expand...
See, to quote Reagan in the debates, "There you go again!", except in this case it's a compliment. LOL! What I'm saying is, look at how you approach a subject... lying on your back, upside down.... how many people do that? So, that's your angle, literally! LOL! I love that you like to do that. I'm usually the one getting the looks. LOL!
Jason198448 said:
Thanks again, you've made my day,
Click to expand...
Made your day? Are you a glutton for punishment or something? LOL!

Lonnit

--
Please visit my gallery at http://pbase.com/lonnit

and offer your comments. Tell me what you like and what you don't, and why. I welcome all opinions. :)

 
lonnit said:
See, to quote Reagan in the debates, "There you go again!", except
in this case it's a compliment. LOL! What I'm saying is, look at
how you approach a subject... lying on your back, upside down....
how many people do that? So, that's your angle, literally! LOL! I
love that you like to do that. I'm usually the one getting the
looks. LOL!
Click to expand...
My wife doesn't mind when I walk around the house on my knees or lie on the floor and stare up at the bottoms of tables and things, or cutting up a calendar and taping little bits of it to my face, for example. She generally is just amused, unless I'm balancing on a chair or hanging off a desk where it's likely I'll break my neck or something. It's when I do that sort of stuff outside where people can see me that she kinda gets edgy. I take it as a badge of pride, it means I might actually be approaching art instead of just taking pictures.

--

--Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population.
--Albert Einstein
 
I went to pick up the 580EX flash and a flash bracket. Well, of course I also needed the cable for the bracket, and then I realized I needed another CF card, and was going to get the Sandisk Extreme II 1 gb, possibly the 2gb, if it wasn't too many $$$. They were out of the Extreme II so I had no choice to get the Extreme III and there was only a $20 difference between 1 & 2 gb, so it would be stupid already to not go for the 2 gb....

I'd just gotten a check from Alamy that about covered the flash, so I told hubby I was going to get it. I'm doing my first party shoot on Sat, so I thought I'd go for the flash bracket. He was ok with that - when it was @ $80 for the bracket, but the bracket was only $60.... however the cable for it was also $60, so the $80 bracket became a $120 bracket, and then there was the sudden rememberance of the need for the CF card, which he doesn't know about yet - an unxpected $150 surprise. So, imagine my fear as I walked out of the shop with a bill for $760.

I'm going to be paid a few $ for this upcoming party shoot, so between the Alamy check and the party, it's a break even. Still, I'm going to have to break this very gently!

Lonnit

--
Please visit my gallery at http://pbase.com/lonnit

and offer your comments. Tell me what you like and what you don't, and why. I welcome all opinions. :)

 
I think it's time to get her in on the action. Cover her face in sprinkles, like Grant did, and parade her around the neighborhood. That should get her over it. Then in the future, she'll be glad to see you doing this stuff alone, without making her join you! LOL!

Lonnit

--
Please visit my gallery at http://pbase.com/lonnit

and offer your comments. Tell me what you like and what you don't, and why. I welcome all opinions. :)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top