Let me start off with something that I think is on the edge of minimalistic
Hmmm. . . hmmmm. . . ?I think the only way to increase the degree of minimalism in that shot is to reduce the lens vignetting so the blue becomes more even.
The question basically is:If your definition stands my picture indeed doesn't meet it. I'm also not sure it's minimalistic either.
What defines minimalism?
Imo it would be an image with a discernable subject (not necessarily a single subject mind you) maximally separated from it surrounds, usually involving lots of negative space.
While this may not be an exhaustive definition, it could perhaps serve as a litmuth test, and i believe the OP image fails in that there is no discernable subject of note?
If your definition stands my picture indeed doesn't meet it. I'm also not sure it's minimalistic either.
However pictures that meet your definition are most probably minimalistic but I find it too limiting and not all pictures behind the link in Russ' original post about minimalism in the coffee corner meet your definition either. Also Googling didn't immediately turn up a better definition. So maybe it's best for this thread to continue with discussion and examples to get more understanding of what a minimalistic photograph looks like.
I think the only way to increase the degree of minimalism in that shot is to reduce the lens vignetting so the blue becomes more even.
On the other hand I would have never thought that checking your sensor for dust spots could result in a picture for this thread ;)
But you've gotta admit, Pieter, it's about as minimal as you can get.You're right Russ, did you get an emotional jolt taking that picture?
In my interpretation (of both the definition and images) i believe there are 2 images that specifically fail the test: the torso with flowershadows, and the prayer in the mosque. The latter image would actually be more of an image with so much going on, you may see something new each time you look at it. Maybe a definition of minimalism needs something negating complexity?I agree with you on the mosque, but the torso and flowers is something reduced to an almost abstract by not showing the whole and therefore closer to minimalist. There are some other shots where the surroundings/negative space becomes part of the subject (for instance the two people on the rim, the person in the stadium seat, the woman hanging from the cliff) and therefore fail (imo) your definition of a single sublject maximally separated from it surrounds while they still would be minimalist in my mind.
I agree with you on the mosque, but the torso and flowers is something reduced to an almost abstract by not showing the whole and therefore closer to minimalist. There are some other shots where the surroundings/negative space becomes part of the subject (for instance the two people on the rim, the person in the stadium seat, the woman hanging from the cliff) and therefore fail (imo) your definition of a single sublject maximally separated from it surrounds while they still would be minimalist in my mind.
I posted this one earlier in the sunrise/sunset thread but I think it's minimalist as well, at least I think it meets the definition
Ah, yes, but by separation i mean "visually distinct" or easily discernable. The subject becomes easily discernable because of minimizing visual stimulus of the surrounds, even though that may be complex patterning.Well for me the picture of the people on the rim is all about the texture, lines and shades of the surrounding and not about the people. Also the woman hanging off the cliff could do without the ship on the other side of the horizon if you want ultimate focus on the subject. I see your point about the torso/shadows not being merely minimalistic.
The torso is more about storytelling imo. There is more than one element that seems to demand our attention with very complex interaction or symbolism.
The odd exception though is this: what about a portrait separated from the background by beautiful backgroundblur?
Is that minimalist only if the head is smaller than 10% of the frame? Or if it is cropped to bare essentials? Maybe just the very side of the head, wrinkles near the eye just visible, so you can just make out the emotion?
The M of Minimalism?
I experiment with this composition a bunch. I dig the subject in the corner :)
In keeping with a low DR approach…
-Dave-
I've posted this here before (long ago), but this remains one of my favorite images ever (as well as the only one to take home an Epson Pano Award when cropped).
Hmmm. . . hmmmm. . . ?
I think you might want to crop out a bit on the left-hand side. Otherwise, +1.
I've posted this here before (long ago), but this remains one of my favorite images ever (as well as the only one to take home an Epson Pano Award when cropped).
How about this one?
Not really (for me). But this might work:
Yes, certainly more minimal. Although I'd prefer to keep the rock off-centre.I don't quite agree with Slobodan on this one. I find it is quite minimalistic. Once the image is enlarged you can see it is really an oval resting on a triangle. And the somewhat over-sharpened granite (at least to me) becomes a background for the major shapes. Small it looks very busy, I think because of the sharpness of the granite which cause you to focus on the granite texture. Maybe you can diffuse the background a bit and allow the edges that create the shapes to be sharp. Can it be more minimalistic? Yes, but it then becomes a different composition and this one is reasonably minimalistic to me and, less the over-sharpened granite, quite good to my eyes.
Jeremy
Are their too many rocks for a minimalist shot? KemYes. But it is a lovely shot and would fit well in a "semi-minimalist" thread. ;)
Are their too many rocks for a minimalist shot? KemI think the border between minimal and minimalistic is broad and fuzzy. This probably isn't minimalistic but indeed a lovely shot.
Why don't you just call it "Without prejudice 3" so everything's fair game and be done with it?"Without prejudice" is without critique, only positive opinions.
Or start a "Zen" thread, which is where the stones would fit well.
Minimalism is about reduction, not inclusion! ;-)
I don't quite agree with Slobodan on this one. I find it is quite minimalistic. Once the image is enlarged you can see it is really an oval resting on a triangle. And the somewhat over-sharpened granite (at least to me) becomes a background for the major shapes. Small it looks very busy, I think because of the sharpness of the granite which cause you to focus on the granite texture. Maybe you can diffuse the background a bit and allow the edges that create the shapes to be sharp. Can it be more minimalistic? Yes, but it then becomes a different composition and this one is reasonably minimalistic to me and, less the over-sharpened granite, quite good to my eyes.
There's a line, somewhere, between "minimalist" and "boring".
Jeremy
And this one sits safely at the minimalist side. Very, very safely i might add...+1.
There's a line, somewhere, between "minimalist" and "boring".
Jeremy
Great shot!
Well I suppose it does now say semi minimalist and of course the judgement is totally subjective but I find the signs somewhat detailed for minimalist, there are words to read :)Actually, I think the image is minimalist. It's all about the sparseness of the scene and how the subject interacts with that scene. By counter-posing the sign against the vastness of the scene, we are forced to look at the sign as a way to study that very relationship.
Mike
Sure. But I think of this more as an abstract.So another question we can have a lengthy debate about is this:
JR
So another question we can have a lengthy debate about is this:Yes, I agree Eric. In some cases it is quite obvious. These categories are elastic and intertwined anyway, like most art.
Can an image be both minimalist and abstract at the same time? ;)
Felt a need to revive this threadGood thinking
Felt a need to revive this thread
Here's one (at least according to me):
I like that.Me too.
Jeremy
I posted this one earlier in the sunrise/sunset thread but I think it's minimalist as well, at least I think it meets the definitionI really like your photo! It's quiet, has a good anchor and the lighting/colors are like Enya's Watermark.
Sunrise in Galveston
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/201204/i-j6tTd2H/0/9c1f7869/O/PEG_A850_07175_20120424.jpg) (https://pegelli.smugmug.com/Other/201204/i-j6tTd2H/A)
The M of Minimalism?Very creative! It inspires me to look at scenes differently.
I really like your photo! It's quiet, has a good anchor and the lighting/colors are like Enya's Watermark.Thank you. I like your "stump" as well, the long exposure makes the water look like ice with no distracting details.
Hmm, lessee...Yes!
What's with the sudden outburst of great images in this thread? Everybody apparently got these great nuggets laying around and not posting them, or what?
Everybody has tried to be somebody else; everybody has.
To imitate or to emulate, that is the question!
But what's wrong then with praising a well executed copy?
do you see the problem, the futility of it all without mission?
Were it a technical challenge, a project openly to ape another photographer, then not a problem. I don't see images posted under those terms. I see people thinking they are showing something new, that they have found a 'voice', as it were.
Yes, i do.
But you can't blame todays fisherman for catching fish they don't actually need for nourishment or survival. We are all amateurs, but for some the result really is just a hobby.
Well, I think a good share of the people here have some knowledge of photo-history and indeed strive to repeat something, somehow, more or less, even if they do not say so explicitly. But I assume there's more awareness about that, than in many other places.
(Maybe little OT: I'm a book-designer/ layouter and was really puzzled many years ago when I first visited the Gutenberg-Museum in Mainz. They have not only that famous first printed bibles, but a rather big collection of the first printed books dating before 1500, so called incunabulums. The interesting thing is, that the type-setters back than really "did it all" within few decades of the than new media. Some pages and spreads would perfectly fit in todays "fancy magazines" and such ...)
(There is a museum of printing in Lyon that impressed me... perhaps because my father was a printer and the end stages of the museum were familiar from my childhood!
Also the fact that Lyon once had a flourishing printing industry because it was more liberal than Geneva, so free thinkers would publish in Lyon to avoid imprisonment at the hands of the Helvetic Catholics... then some years later, post-reformation the current reversed its flow.)
Back to "everything has been done."
Yes, but... if Doisneau and HCB and Peter Turner pretty much exhausted all the formal novelty possible within street photography... they were also photographing the human condition. If HCB turned his photos upside down to better see the abstract geometry, he wasn't making photograms, the formal structure was a scaffold on which he displayed people. So then Avedon got quite a bit of milage from sticking heads and bodies in front of white seamless, apparently eschewing formal structure in favour of capturing the individual... except his individuals were also "types".
That seems to me the real challenge of representational art, to capture something about the human condition which is neither so general that it is old news ("White trash woman high-school graduate from poor mid-west town #23") nor so specific that it is of interest only to Nora Bloggs and her closest relatives. In that sense, novels are also representational art facing the same struggle. It's tempting to say that people are still writing novels, but a visit to the second-hand book markets on Sunday morning are terrifying for anyone who imagine becoming a writer.
Maybe Warhol knew something when he said a good photo is one that is in focus and contains a famous person... that the only true remaining art is the performance of celebrity and its documenation. Or maybe that is irrelevant, and the answer is in Camus, of Sisyphus continually pushing his rock up the hill, in order to experience the pushing.
just put your favourite image on the monitor, reverse it, and it looks terrible.
I don't see images posted under those terms. I see people thinking they are showing something new, that they have found a 'voice', as it were.Is that really true? Aren't people just trying to show something pleasing (for themselves and maybe also for other viewers) irrespective if it's been done before or not.
Is that really true? Aren't people just trying to show something pleasing (for themselves and maybe also for other viewers) irrespective if it's been done before or not.
Au contraire! I certainly do disapprove of needless killing; who are we to decide when something has to die for our "fun" and perverted sense of achievement?
Well, yes, we are in agreement there. Better make that worthwhile. Moreover, the way we treat livestock prior to it serving as our food, is another indicator of our questionable indifference in superiority.
Even for the digital age one could wonder if all the energy required to serve irrelevant information which also requires additional effort to be curated and filtered, is actually a waste of significant proportions. And I'm not just talking pictures here.
wouldn't life and the planet be a better place without the expense in reserves to provide all this digital shit called entertainment and social media?
it's absolutely dumb for an athlete to run, not to know about how fast others are, just claiming proudly "look, I'm the fastest".
I wonder what van Gogh thought about competing with other painters as he circulated in and around the asylum in Arles ?
He did discuss trends extensively with his brother, as well as with fellow artists, but eventually decided that what people wanted was not what he wanted (to paint).
Good for us, not so good for him, I suppose.
I fully admit that I take photos not because I’m in any way driven to but because it sharpens my perceptual skills. And it’s a technical challenge too, which my analytically-oriented brain enjoys. Also the doing of it, the heightened state of awareness that sometimes happens, is pleasurable.
People like van Gogh fascinate and delight me both because they’re so throughly other to my own experience and also because their particular kind of otherness leads to such outpourings of creative richness. Even as it often eats them up.
-Dave-
In which way do you find photography a technical challenge? Digital has removed most of the challenges that filmies had to learn to handle - not overcome, because one can't do the impossible - but certainly one did learn to appreciate the limits and perhaps use them to some degree of effect - or even as a signature style, in some cases.
One reason I’ve returned to the Leicas for general pic taking is that they require you to do more. During my last trail walk I gave myself a brief: take photos in bright daylight with a wide open fast lens and mostly place the point of focus well off-center (focus & recompose). This made me work harder, which made the process (and my walk) more enjoyable. I looked at my surroundings differently. I took a selfie in a toilet. :D
-Dave-
Then you chose the wrong weapon: I've set my two old diggies up to as close as dammit filmic control just to uncomplicate my life. However, if you want complex, revert back to digital modes and those two mothers can offer more complications than a typewriter gone wrong. They could offer you as much difficulty as any masochist could possibly dream about. You could even throw in chimping, just to round off the steps to each shot.
The turning of the seasons
Very beautiful, Oscar.+1.
Rob
Very beautiful, Oscar.
+2You managed to incorporate the urban with nature. Well done and interesting juxtaposition of elements.
an ethereal horizon 7,500 ft above sea levelQuite bold of you to photograph something we all don't think twice about. You have to enlarge the image to see the wispy parts and get a sense of the feathery light clouds and natural colour sky.
Lamp and window light...series, sort of...
Quite bold of you to photograph something we all don't think twice about. You have to enlarge the image to see the wispy parts and get a sense of the feathery light clouds and natural colour sky.
JR
UntitledI know you are feeling frustration at not being near enought to the city to do Street photography on a daily basis.
Untitled
Minimum minimalism permissible?Yup.
:-)
... White Hole:
First post in the thread for 2018. Happy New Year ;)
White Hole:
Looks great in that setting!
... the photography people are not impressed, but the interior design and architecture folks love it :)
Which underlines the importance of framing, presentation, print size, and context (i.e., display environment). Says Slobodan, The Interior Design Aficionado :)
P.S. Is that a real environment, or one of those software simulations?
Ooh! Lovely!Thanks Eric, I appreciate the response, albeit, minimal ;)
To the coreVery classy, Pieter.
Lovely JNB_RareReminds me of Union Station in Toronto. Same patina and they have trees around the property also. Well seen.
Reminds me of Union Station in Toronto. Same patina and they have trees around the property also. Well seen.
Ah yes, I think I am getting closer. I believe there are about three buildings in the area that have similar patina. If memory serves, one is the side of the museum. Here is almost dead ringer for your shot, albeit with a wider view. For me, at the time it was about capturing the light play from reflections of other buildings.
JR
Ah yes, I think I am getting closer. I believe there are about three buildings in the area that have similar patina. If memory serves, one is the side of the museum. Here is almost dead ringer for your shot, albeit with a wider view. For me, at the time it was about capturing the light play from reflections of other buildings.
JR
Ah yes, I think I am getting closer. I believe there are about three buildings in the area that have similar patina. If memory serves, one is the side of the museum. Here is almost dead ringer for your shot, albeit with a wider view. For me, at the time it was about capturing the light play from reflections of other buildings.
JR
That's truly minimal, John.Thanks Eric. I am sure Peter won't mind. He probably didn't know about this thread :D
So does it really belong in the Semi-minimalism thread? :D
P.S. I like it.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4912/44476739720_a147f0e73e_c.jpg)
That's truly minimal, John.
So does it really belong in the Semi-minimalism thread? :D
P.S. I like it.
Love.
Thank you KLaban
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4594/25275179878_06c1e705d5_c.jpg)
These are both lovely, Michael.Indeed they are.
These are both lovely, Michael.
These are both lovely, Michael.
A lovely set, JNB.I Especially like the second one. It's quite a striking contrast between, leaf?, shadows and white wall.
Remains of autumn.
Nice!Semi or not I like it! How many times have we gone by one of those?
Another "semi" shot. (minimalist colour?)
Hmmm. . . hmmmm. . . ?
It's all about the lines and delicate shading when the light and landscape is so white.
JR
Not the composition?Of course, you need both. I took it for granted that would include good composition.
Of course, you need both. I took it for granted that would include good composition.
JR
Nice one, Armand.
2
Armand, there's a birdman hiding in you. That's a good capture, especially considering the type of bird.Thanks! This was lucky. The light was gorgeous and the birds flew right above me. Unfortunately the RX10 iii which I had with me was turned off, so it took some time to start and zoom it; to its credit it was able to focus fast enough that I got 3 shots, this being the most appealing.
Another nice "abstract," Armand.
It's a nice abstract, but it's hardly minimalist. Or even semi-minimalist.
Jeremy
“20 Stunning Examples Of Black & White Minimal Photographs”Those are some nice ones. But they don't have a Slobodan among them.
https://www.lightstalking.com/black-white-minimal-photographs/
Those are some nice ones. But they don't have a Slobodan among them.The two I like best are from Fernando Reyes- pure white environment and light falling onto walls; and 8 moments- snow falling against outline of fence and bench. Gorgeous.
Nice one, Peter.
Would it have been a challenge to get that sense of delicacy in paint? Just curious.
Eric