POLL - Weekly comp ABSTRACT

[Oldboy]

Maybe we should organise an open fire   abstract discussion weekend somewhere. With wine, or a single malt,  s o we could discuss and drink, without the need to type or to drive home afterwards.         

I'm giving up for tonight.

Wine or a single malt. Now that sounds good. 

[Simple]

I am all for it, a lovely B&B somewhere nice with some daytime to shoot some pics as well.

[Oldboy]

I'd still say that neither of the two images you have posted are abstract Re, because it is obvious what they are. They are representational, impressionistic, IMHO, so not abstract.

Pollock, Rothko, Mondrian, Frankethaler, Malevich etc etc are abstract artists - purely colours and form, not representational.

I've stated my point of view, I can see everyone else disagrees, so we shall have to agree to differ.

Abstract images are those that group shapes and colours together. Because you know what they were doesn't mean that they are not abstract images. As man is born with the ability to see patterns in any shapes, or groups of shapes and colours, then it should be impossible to create a purely abstract image? As Pollock dripped paint onto a canvas he had a pattern in mind, therefore, it could not be a true abstract image. Abstract art is showing a object in a different way and not the normal way you see it. Taking a picture of a house and turning it upside-down could be classed as abstract, as it's not the normal way we see it. 

[Reinardina]

I am all for it, a lovely B&B somewhere nice with some daytime to shoot some pics as well.

As long as it fits in with other plans, and is easy to reach by public transport (had to give up my licence), I'm all for it.

(Still not very keen to travel by train on my own, but I will have to get used to it.)

[Hinfrance]

I'm not too sure about the 'or' part. I find that a single malt nightcap after a rich merlot is rather pleasing.

[Beaux Reflets]

Abstract images are those that group shapes and colours together. Because you know what they were doesn't mean that they are not abstract images. As man is born with the ability to see patterns in any shapes, or groups of shapes and colours, then it should be impossible to create a purely abstract image? As Pollock dripped paint onto a canvas he had a pattern in mind, therefore, it could not be a true abstract image. Abstract art is showing a object in a different way and not the normal way you see it. Taking a picture of a house and turning it upside-down could be classed as abstract, as it's not the normal way we see it. 

An interesting discussion - My creation photographing and editing the reflection of a single LED lamp caught in Double glazing (that needs a good clean) sqeezes in or sits outside the topic 

I like images that imply or inspire some thoughts to and for the observer; So an Abstract that engages the viewer suits me 

[jinky]

Just got back from a trip to Gran canaria and see the result and discussion. To be honest - I wasn`t sure when I entered it. Saw a few different definitions when making my mind up and the one Oldboy quoted was the one I went for roughly in terms of thinking it fits. I`m not sure how you can get across "abstract" with a machine that shoots what is there. As for digital manipulation yes I upped white balance and a few tweaks here and there but otherwise  all done in camera. As soon as I get unpacked I`ll think of a theme for next one. As I always say - it`s the voters that decide what fits the brief.

2nd problem is a  faulty LX100 which I fear malfunctioned when on a windy beach. Didn`t even get it out of the case but i fear fine sand got in there. Time for me to test John Lewis 5 year warranty. It`s a faulty zoom mechanism showing up but I fear it is grit and a close held Dyson vac has failed to shift it. ever been happy with the dust that has shown up on pictures at certain apertures and not the first time I`ve seen that fault. Annoying!