12 thoughts on “Door With Oblique Shadows

        1. Much appreciated! Being a bit of a traditionalist, I prefer “found” abstractions much more than those which are created post-capture.

          Technically speaking, this picture is semi-abstract because there’s a visual cue which identifies the subject. Those types of abstractions are my favorites because you can increase or decrease the strength of the cues. Sometimes you think you know what you’re looking at but you’re not exactly sure…that would be a “weak” cue.

          Aaron Siskind was one of the first photographers to create images of that sort, and I’ve always admired his approach.

          Here’s a link to some more of my abstractions:
          https://johntodaro.wordpress.com/gallery-9-jazz/

  1. “Being a bit of a traditionalist, I prefer “found” abstractions much more than those which are created post-capture.” – No disagreement with this! I understand very well, what you mean. PP in case of abstraction could be a killer. Your explanation with the visual cue is interesting.

    I think there has to be found a balance between an object you want to report and your way of seeing it. If you are more on the report side – and you are sometimes – you take documentary pictures. If you are more on the subjective side you go into abstraction. In your set 9 Jazz you proofed it very well, because jazz is nothing else but this: Finding a balance between the objectivity of music played by you band mates and your own way of interpretation and expression. Right?

    1. Interesting thoughts on “report vs subjective” approaches.

      I totally agree that a balance is something to seek, even if you have a tendency toward one side or the other. In the past I was much less flexible about this, but these days I like crossing the line. We’re in an age of eclecticism in photography, and that’s a good thing, I think.

      The experience of living includes a great deal of variety so why shouldn’t our photographs reflect at least a bit of that?

      That being said, there are those who only take photographs of the natural world…and then there are those who only interpret the natural world with evidence of humans (many–but not all– of my pictures)…and then there are those who only document humans (many–but not all– of your pictures).

      It’s fine to have a predilection for one of these approaches, but when it becomes completely rigid we run the risk of shutting down the emotive power of our work. We also might miss some extraordinary images that are outside the usual agenda.

      I could be wrong, but I’ve come to think that a photographer can reflect the complexity of the life experience and a style can be developed which crosses back and forth from “report to subjective”.

      1. You are absolutely right. To find a balance between report and subjective way of capturing is not a law. Its more a hint to understand, what we are doing while taking pictures. For me its also a way to interpret the pictures of other photographers helping me learn from them. In real life there are more ways crosses and a lot more of back and forth, as you said.

        It’s nice to discuss this things. Cheers – KUM

    2. Jazz Gallery? I was mainly thinking about the blast of colors and syncopation…it looks a little brassy in there.

      And in the case of the water abstractions—improvisation. Those were shot from the hip, so to speak.

Comments are closed.