abstracts

[ckimmerle]

These images are a bit of a departure for me, but I found them while exploring my new hometown. I won't spoil the illusion by revealing anything other than the pix.

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

I like the images and the different graphical figures you have introduced with them.

But I have a slight problem with the small white spots inside the images, which make them appear uncalm to me
and these counteract the original graphical statement.
I don't know if this is from sharpening for the web or whatsever or even intended.
I assume a print would be much different.

But - still - I like them and the concept I see behind.

EDIT: second thought:
A bit of these spots I think is good to avoid the images being too polished - maybe I'm picky - its just a bit too much for my personal taste.

[tom b]

Like your work.
Great images.

Cheers,

[graeme]

Beautiful.

How large will they be printed?

Will they be printed?

Graeme

[Rob C]

Hi Chuck

Quite right not to reveal the reality; always best to let imagination run riot!

Oddly, this is one instance when I feel  that I would have preferred colour. This is probably less to do with the pics than my mind seeking an answer to the puzzle and thinking colour would have helped me find a solution.

Perhaps there's a deeper question in this. B/W works very well when it forms the representation of a subject we already understand: a body, for example. Then, it puts it into a different mental space and we can opinionate to our heart's content from a familiar base line of our own. When that basic information isn't available, do we get curious or, perhaps, do we get concerned instead?

Rob C

[Bruce Cox]

Hi Chuck

Quite right not to reveal the reality; always best to let imagination run riot!

Oddly, this is one instance when I feel  that I would have preferred colour. This is probably less to do with the pics than my mind seeking an answer to the puzzle and thinking colour would have helped me find a solution.

Perhaps there's a deeper question in this. B/W works very well when it forms the representation of a subject we already understand: a body, for example. Then, it puts it into a different mental space and we can opinionate to our heart's content from a familiar base line of our own. When that basic information isn't available, do we get curious or, perhaps, do we get concerned instead?

Rob C

I get curious if I can't fill in the dots from memory.  I like being curious though when I keep finding hints to go on.  With enough hints [and under lying art] I can invent an answer and more focused questions to play with.  When the image is the subject more information is usually better for me, either B&W or color, and these web photos have only so much.  For me #3 comes closest to being rewarding so far and I would like to see it in color or in more B&W. 

Bruce

[ckimmerle]

....I like being curious though when I keep finding hints to go on.  With enough hints [and under lying art] I can invent an answer and more focused questions to play with...

Steichen found that out when he started doing abstracts in the early 1900's. Without a basic understanding of the subject matter, his viewers found it difficult to understand the work. So, he moved towards more recognizable subject matter for his abstracts. As photography was relatively new at the time, I think the public simply preferred photos be more literal. That is, after all, what they were used to and why photography was invented only few decades earlier.

However, I think there are subjects that defy easy translation. I am afraid these are of that type. They appear here very close to how they actually look. There is no manipulation on my part other than conversion to black and white and some bumps in contrast. Despite how it may appear, the subject has almost no color.

Personally, I'm not sure about them. I like 'em, mind you, but am not confident in their ability to hold a viewers interest for the very reason that Bruce has suggested. Still, I cannot seem to relegate them to the "tried but failed" pile. That, my friends, is why I'm trying them out here.

I sincerely appreciate the feedback.

[RSL]

Chuck, Yep, that looks like Wyoming all right.

Seriously though, I'm caught in the same dilemma you're caught in: I think I like them but I wouldn't hang them on my wall, as I would have done with your North Dakota winter pictures (had I had any wall space left).

[Bruce Cox]

For me it is a question of: Is it a window or an object?  Is it something that is here at hand [physical, though not just literal] or something in the other space in which we suspend disbelief?  If it is an object; I can quit worrying about where it came from and look at it.  If it is a window; I need to know what else is out there.  Square on shots of flat surfaces look like they might be physically in our space without imagining an extension of it or "window".  However, unless flat photos somehow declare themselves to be the whole story and physically just in this space, they can end up looking like a very shallow window scenes.  A sense that the photo stops at its frame and has its own reasons for unity help brake the "glass" that might otherwise be over it.  All of which I am sure has been said before.  AOWIASHBSB.

Bruce