RE: Diary 2022-10-01
a) Sehr schade, dass Malewitsch nicht erwähnt wird. Manch andere Maler fehlen auch, aber vor allem Malewitsch.
b) Die Definition finde ich gut nachvollziehbar.
c) Ja, das ist genau das Problem, das ich auch gesehen habe: ein ungegenständliches Foto scheint ein Widerspruch in sich selbst zu sein, denn was sollte ich knipsen wenn nicht einen irgendwie gearteten Gegenstand?! Insofern war und ist es schon richtig, wenn @lllll1ll seinen Wettbewerb für "abstrakte" Fotografie ausgeschrieben hatte.
a) It is a pity that Malevich is not mentioned. Some other painters are also missing, but especially Malevich.
b) I find the definition easy to understand.
c) Yes, that is exactly the problem I have also seen: a non-representational photo seems to be a contradiction in terms, because what should I take a picture of if not an object of some kind? In this respect, it was and is correct when @lllll1ll announced his competition for "abstract" photography.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
If we consider a photo without post-processing, then it cannot be a "non-representative photo".
That's for sure. But with the help of modern post-processing tools (not to mention artificial intelligence technologies), I can make a "non-representative photo" out of an ordinary photo.
Will it have at least some cultural or artistic value... :)
So it is no longer a photo, is it?
Yes, I agree, I think that if more than basic tools are used in post-processing, it's not really a photo anymore. This is closer to the artist's painting.
But on the other hand, the result was not taken out of my head, the foundation was real objects.
Exactly!!