Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 50 of 121 FirstFirst ... 40484950515260100 ... LastLast
Results 491 to 500 of 1207

Thread: Abstracts

  1. #491
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Kharkiv, Ukraine
    Posts
    1,201
    Sod1, I too regret that you have removed the works. They liked me. But it seemed to me, that they would be looked more harmoniously in Thread Digital Manipulation
    Most likely this misunderstanding was the result my awful English.
    Once again excuse.
    The main lining in a computer - between the monitor and a chair
    My photo gallery in Flickr

  2. #492
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by JTL
    Why do you draw a boundary where there is none? I am truly intrestred in why you feel the media and medium matter. To me, a sensor is a canvas, light is a paintbrush...bits and bytes are paint. Who is anyone to dare question the validity of what the artist chooses to do with these tools?

    There will always be artists and there will always be critics. But who do you know that has art reviews hanging on their walls?
    That's of course an interesting comparison, JTL, and I agree with you. Photography is, like painting, an art and like you said there are lots of similarities. However, my point was that when you compare abstracts in photography to abstracts in painting there is a distinct difference. Abstracts in painting is defined as "not aiming to depict an object but composed with the focus on internal structure and form". If you look at abstracts in photography you will see that this definition only applies to a small portion of the abstracts. Only for that reason I drew a line between photography and painting.

    My intent when first posting on this subject was not to question the validity of anyone using the tools of digital photography. I was merely under the impression that a brushstrokes filter alone does not make a picture any more abstract than it already is. Of course, it can be a great effect and in the pictures conserned it invariably was, but I did not think it was abstract.

    And no, art reviews are generally not hung on a wall. They are read, and if they are good, they are read and enjoyed by a lot of people. Good writing can also be an art. The paper is the canvas, the pen is the paintbrush, and the letters are paint. At the moment I am reading "The Ebony Tower" by John Fowles. A book which contains a lot of criticism towards abstract art, but which in itself can definitly be considered a true work of art.
    Nikon D-50
    // Nikkor 70-300 f/4-5.6 VR // Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8
    // Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 ...// Nikon SB-600
    // Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6......// Nikon Series E 135 mm f/2.8
    // Kiron 105 f/2.8 Macro....// Manfrotto 190XPROB + 488RC4
    // Nikkor 35 f/1.8..........// Sigma 500 mm f/8

    My website: http://www.dennisdolkens.nl

  3. #493
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Prospero
    Good writing can also be an art. The paper is the canvas, the pen is the paintbrush, and the letters are paint.
    An excellent point...

    Quote Originally Posted by Prospero
    At the moment I am reading "The Ebony Tower" by John Fowles. A book which contains a lot of criticism towards abstract art, but which in itself can definitly be considered a true work of art.
    Maybe "abstract artists" should start criticizing the critics...

    By the way, artists' don't say "I'm an impressionist" or "I'm an abstract artist"...that's what those who do not understand what the artist is doing say about them...because they need a way to "categorize" the art into some simple form or level on which they can bring their own understanding to it. But, most artists (at least here in NYC) don't care if you understand the art or not. And, if you say you understand it, they just might have a chuckle behind your back. Now, everyone "projects" their own meaning onto art. The most successful artists are those who can manipulate those projections...whether consciously or not. Just don't ever make the mistake of believing you understand it from the artist's point of view. And don't ever think you have the right to make value judgments regarding it. Someone doesn't like some art? No one says they have to. Someone says something that an artist presents as their art is not art? Who are they to say?
    Some Gear: Nikon D700; Nikkor AF-S 50 f/1.4 G; Nikkor AF-S 24-85 3.f/5-4.5 G ED; Tamron 28-300 f/3.5-6.3 VC; Nikon SB-800; Velbon Maxi-F; Canon Pixma Pro 9000; Canon S3IS, Canon SD500; Epson 4990; Epson P5000; Wacom Intuos 3

    Main Software: Capture NX2; Adobe PhotoShop CS2; Corel Paintshop Pro X2 Ultimate

    Sold: Canon XT/350D, EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Sigma 18-200 OS; Canon ET EF 25II; Kenko Pro 300 DG, Canon 430EX, Canon BG-E3.

  4. #494
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Kharkiv, Ukraine
    Posts
    1,201
    Quote Originally Posted by JTL
    By the way, artists' don't say "I'm an impressionist" or "I'm an abstract artist"...that's what those who do not understand what the artist is doing say about them...because they need a way to "categorize" the art into some simple form or level on which they can bring their own understanding to it.
    ...
    Let to not agree with you!
    Anyhow the person distinguishes that that he sense (sees, hears, perceives, etc.) on a category. Otherwise he would be is not capable to separate one sense from another.
    And still an example: I think at an exhibition of children's images an erotic / porno photos would be looked a little out of place...
    The main lining in a computer - between the monitor and a chair
    My photo gallery in Flickr

  5. #495
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Kushnirenko
    Let to not agree with you!
    Anyhow the person distinguishes that that he sense (sees, hears, perceives, etc.) on a category. Otherwise he would be is not capable to separate one sense from another.
    And still an example: I think at an exhibition of children's images an erotic / porno photos would be looked a little out of place...
    You may perceive a category...but that does not mean the artist did. Your category is a construction of your mind, not the artist's. Do not presume to think your eye and the artist's eye is the same eye...
    Some Gear: Nikon D700; Nikkor AF-S 50 f/1.4 G; Nikkor AF-S 24-85 3.f/5-4.5 G ED; Tamron 28-300 f/3.5-6.3 VC; Nikon SB-800; Velbon Maxi-F; Canon Pixma Pro 9000; Canon S3IS, Canon SD500; Epson 4990; Epson P5000; Wacom Intuos 3

    Main Software: Capture NX2; Adobe PhotoShop CS2; Corel Paintshop Pro X2 Ultimate

    Sold: Canon XT/350D, EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Sigma 18-200 OS; Canon ET EF 25II; Kenko Pro 300 DG, Canon 430EX, Canon BG-E3.

  6. #496
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Kharkiv, Ukraine
    Posts
    1,201
    Quote Originally Posted by JTL
    You may perceive a category...but that does not mean the artist did. Your category is a construction of your mind, not the artist's. Do not presume to think your eye and the artist's eye is the same eye...
    Oh! Where us has incurred...
    Then one more example:
    Let's take a word the Tree.
    For inhabitants of Siberia is most likely a pine
    For the Canadian - a maple
    For the European - a deciduous tree
    For the inhabitant of tropics - a palm tree.
    ...
    How many people, are so much and opinions...
    The main lining in a computer - between the monitor and a chair
    My photo gallery in Flickr

  7. #497
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Kushnirenko
    Oh! Where us has incurred...
    Then one more example:
    Let's take a word the Tree.
    For inhabitants of Siberia is most likely a pine
    For the Canadian - a maple
    For the European - a deciduous tree
    For the inhabitant of tropics - a palm tree.
    ...
    How many people, are so much and opinions...
    You speak of things, I of thoughts. Everyone has opinions...but no one can claim to be in the mind of the artist. Can you?
    Some Gear: Nikon D700; Nikkor AF-S 50 f/1.4 G; Nikkor AF-S 24-85 3.f/5-4.5 G ED; Tamron 28-300 f/3.5-6.3 VC; Nikon SB-800; Velbon Maxi-F; Canon Pixma Pro 9000; Canon S3IS, Canon SD500; Epson 4990; Epson P5000; Wacom Intuos 3

    Main Software: Capture NX2; Adobe PhotoShop CS2; Corel Paintshop Pro X2 Ultimate

    Sold: Canon XT/350D, EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Sigma 18-200 OS; Canon ET EF 25II; Kenko Pro 300 DG, Canon 430EX, Canon BG-E3.

  8. #498
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by JTL
    Maybe "abstract artists" should start criticizing the critics...

    By the way, artists' don't say "I'm an impressionist" or "I'm an abstract artist"...that's what those who do not understand what the artist is doing say about them...because they need a way to "categorize" the art into some simple form or level on which they can bring their own understanding to it. But, most artists (at least here in NYC) don't care if you understand the art or not. And, if you say you understand it, they just might have a chuckle behind your back. Now, everyone "projects" their own meaning onto art. The most successful artists are those who can manipulate those projections...whether consciously or not. Just don't ever make the mistake of believing you understand it from the artist's point of view. And don't ever think you have the right to make value judgments regarding it. Someone doesn't like some art? No one says they have to. Someone says something that an artist presents as their art is not art? Who are they to say?
    Good point, critics are indeed often too eager to classify art. They put each artist into a box, for instance cubism, impressionism, pointilism or whatever and from then on don't look at their work in any other way. This anxiety to have everything classified is pointless, it is often distracting the attention from artistic vision itself. On the other hand it can be argued that the division in streams is needed to get some clarity in the world of art.

    By the way, critics are often critisized. It is commonly said that critics are only artists who were not good enough to make it in the artistic world. However, I don't think we should underestimate the role of critics in art. Of course no painter, photographer, writer or any other kind of artist creates only for the purpose of getting good reviews. However, criticism can have a lot of influence on artists. It can make them think about their work in a different way making them see things they didn't see before. Even though critics are often hated they are of fundamental importance for the developement of art. And, ultimately, no-one can and should prevent a critic from giving his opinion, for freedom of speech is just as important as freedom of artistry.

    I agree with you that you can never claim to be in the mind of the artist. You can never claim that your interpretation is what the artist had in mind. However, this does not mean that your own interpretation does not matter. You said that art is whatever the artist says it is, but I think it is much more than that. I think it is one of the good things of art that everyone can have his own personal interpretation about a work of art. The personal interpretation and what the artist was trying to express will always differ, but that does not mean that the interpretation is wrong.
    Nikon D-50
    // Nikkor 70-300 f/4-5.6 VR // Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8
    // Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 ...// Nikon SB-600
    // Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6......// Nikon Series E 135 mm f/2.8
    // Kiron 105 f/2.8 Macro....// Manfrotto 190XPROB + 488RC4
    // Nikkor 35 f/1.8..........// Sigma 500 mm f/8

    My website: http://www.dennisdolkens.nl

  9. #499
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Prospero
    I agree with you that you can never claim to be in the mind of the artist. You can never claim that your interpretation is what the artist had in mind. However, this does not mean that your own interpretation does not matter. You said that art is whatever the artist says it is, but I think it is much more than that. I think it is one of the good things of art that everyone can have his own personal interpretation about a work of art. The personal interpretation and what the artist was trying to express will always differ, but that does not mean that the interpretation is wrong.
    And you have nicely brought this full circle...

    You couldn't be more right. Art serves no purpose beyond the artist's self-satisfaction without the viewers' interpretation. Art is only meaningful if it has meaning to us. I recently did a piece and the "consensus" interpretation was actually something I had subconsciously did that I didn't see at first!

    But, you seem to know where I was going with all this...building false barriers only limits our ability to experience the art on as many levels as possible...sometimes even beyond the artist's own vision...
    Some Gear: Nikon D700; Nikkor AF-S 50 f/1.4 G; Nikkor AF-S 24-85 3.f/5-4.5 G ED; Tamron 28-300 f/3.5-6.3 VC; Nikon SB-800; Velbon Maxi-F; Canon Pixma Pro 9000; Canon S3IS, Canon SD500; Epson 4990; Epson P5000; Wacom Intuos 3

    Main Software: Capture NX2; Adobe PhotoShop CS2; Corel Paintshop Pro X2 Ultimate

    Sold: Canon XT/350D, EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Sigma 18-200 OS; Canon ET EF 25II; Kenko Pro 300 DG, Canon 430EX, Canon BG-E3.

  10. #500
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by JTL
    And you have nicely brought this full circle...
    I guess that brings this discusion to a nice ending (unless somebody else still has something to say). I thought it was really interesting. Thanks for sharing your thoughts about art, JTL. By the way, you said "I recently did a piece"; are you also a painter or is it another piece of art you are talking about?.

    Time to post some pictures in this thread again; here's one I did today:

    Last edited by Prospero; 05-09-2006 at 10:46 AM.
    Nikon D-50
    // Nikkor 70-300 f/4-5.6 VR // Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8
    // Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 ...// Nikon SB-600
    // Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6......// Nikon Series E 135 mm f/2.8
    // Kiron 105 f/2.8 Macro....// Manfrotto 190XPROB + 488RC4
    // Nikkor 35 f/1.8..........// Sigma 500 mm f/8

    My website: http://www.dennisdolkens.nl

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •