RE: my contribution to Abstract photography – Stage 2
Ich habe eine interessante Definition von Abstraktion gefunden. Es hat einen Punkt darin, den ich fettgedruckt habe
Die abstrakte Fotografie sollte Sie also zu Überlegungen führen, die nicht direkt mit dem zusammenhängen, was auf dem Foto abgebildet ist. Es ist eine Art Assoziationsspiel. :)
Я нашёл интересное определение абстракции. В нём есть момент, который я выделил жирным шрифтом
АБСТРАКЦИЯ
(от лат. abstractio — отвлечение), формирование образов реальности (представлений, понятий, суждений) посредством отвлечения и пополнения, т. е. путём использования (или усвоения) лишь части из множества соответствующих данных и прибавления к этой части новой информации, не вытекающей из этих данных
Таким образом абстрактная фотография должна приводить вас к рассуждениям, которые непосредственно не связаны с тем, что изображено на фотографии. Это своего рода игра в ассоциации.
Sehr schön! Ja, das ist es! Wer spielt es? Ich denke, zwei Spieler: der Fotograf und der Betrachter.
Das ist etwas zu allgemein formuliert. Wenn meine Überlegungen, meine Assoziationen abschweifen, dann ist das Foto deswegen noch nicht abstrakt. Ein Foto von einem Panther in einem Käfig zum Beispiel würde möglicherweise zu vielen Überlegungen über Gefangenschaft oder über Art-gerechte Tierhaltung führen, obwohl das Foto überhaupt nicht abstrakt wäre.
Very nice! Yes, it is! Who plays it? I think two players: the photographer and the viewer.
That's a bit too general. If my reflections, my associations digress, then the photo is not yet abstract because of that. A photo of a panther in a cage, for example, would possibly lead to many thoughts about captivity or about species-appropriate animal husbandry, although the photo would not be abstract at all.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
I agree, any photo can cause associations that are abstract from its essence. But this may not happen.
If the photo pretends to be an abstraction... the absence of abstract associations will not be in her favor.
The very essence of abstraction (as a philosophical technique) implies some further reflection, a deeper immersion in the image.
Maybe the key point of abstract photography is to create some kind of image?
Which photo pretends to be an abstraction? I think: none! A photo or any image is not able to pretend something, since it is showing something.
But while by photographing you collect some information through a lense, your painting or drawing would not be bound on such circumstancies. So, a painting or drawing really can be abstract in this, that it shows no object outside itself. That is no pretending to be abstract.
Pretending to be an abstract image comes through context only, I believe. So it is me, the photographer, who pretends to show an abstract photo. My pretention can be denied by guessing what I shotted, and if not, my pretention could be denied by the simple fact that I must have shotted something.
In painting an abstract image, there is no possibility like the above: if I smash together some colours, no one will be able to assure, that I painted an object. The abstraction from objects is "static" (in contrary to the "dynamic" and communicative play between photographer and viewer).
Another question is on the aesthetics: which picture is valuable? This is hardly to predict; it depends on the richness of shapes, colors, and associations and therefore it is again in the communicative and dynamic play between creator and viewer.