This photo was made by Paul Strand.
Focus: The image is focused and visible but you can't completely tell what it is when you first look at it. Light: The light shines on the object(s) and makes them not easy to see. This photo is a picture of a table but you can't originally spot what it is by first look. Line&Shape: There are multiple lines in this picture, especially strong straight ones created by light and shadow. The table is revealed by a huge curve going around, and that shows it could be a table. Lines are geometrically made by man made objects and it looks like there is a staircase and the table is right under it. Repetition: The lines are repeating across the table, they're in parallel with each other, more than across each other. Space: The photo looks like it was taken quite close to the main object. Texture: The object(s) in the image look(s) pretty smooth, so if you touched it, it would be smooth. The shadow being straight and not lumpy or not ridged creates the smooth feeling. Value/Tone: In the photograph there are different tones, shades, shadows and bursts of light created. The photo looks brownish because it might have been taken quite some time ago, or it could've been because of the quality of paper the photographer used for the photo, or he deliberately made it like that as he wanted it to look old. |
These photographs were taken at school, they are meant to be abstract. I focused on lines & shapes. I think my photographs are linked to abstraction because there are many shapes, like squares and rectangles. Most of my photos have a lot of lines from windows and walls. There is also value/tone, because in most of the photos there are shades and reflections from the sky and buildings. The space in the photographs have a range of close and far; some photos I took from quite close to show mostly lines and contrast instead of the whole main object. The ones that are from far away show a hint of the main object but it doesn't show it fully, which is linked to the focus that is an element of abstraction. In the future I would make images more different, but still very abstract. I could try using effects, or a different camera or a different particular place to take pictures. I also did a certain type of view and certain framing so the edges would stand out in the image and so you could only see some part of the building but not all of it. It also showed only some so you could see reflections. |
These photos I think are related to abstraction, I took them while on holiday and at home. Many of the photos are of buildings. The pictures show different lines and shapes. For example they have lines going throughout the buildings, and there are mainly shapes like squares and rectangles.
In one of the photos there is a road and tops of trees are in parallel with the road. There is mainly value/tone in this picture because there is a grey sky and the trees are making a black shade. |
I took more photos at school, I used the element lines&shape and also light. I tried to make some photos not show the full main object so it could be some type of abstraction. Because sometimes abstract means complicated and I thought if I made the main object not so visible, it would look complicated to explain. Some photos need improving, but some I think can represent abstraction. It would be even better if I had more time to take my pictures.
|
This photograph was taken by an unknown artist, it relates to abstraction because it contains some of the main abstract elements. Which are Line, Repetition, Shape and Space. The lines go across the object which is a building, and lines are also repeated across the building. There are rectangles and squares made by the lines, as well as triangles. The angle at which the photo was taken makes the building look very high and taking a lot of space. This picture looks like was taken at midday, and the camera was on the side of the building where the sun was.
|
This photograph was also taken by an unknown photographer, as the first one, I found this on pinterest and thought it was related to abstraction. The elements this photograph has, are lines going across and along the object which also looks like a building, There is light and value/tone because there are shadows which make a grey shade scale. There is light shining on the side of the building we can see, but inside, where it looks like windows are, there are dark shadows. It looks like the photograph was taken during near midday when the sun was shining on the building. There is unusual shape element of the building because the dark looking windows are forming squares and rectangles.
|
This photo, made by Edward Quigley in 1930. It's a photogram, it's made by using a photographic paper and reacting it with light for several seconds, the black shows where there was light and no objects, the white shows where there were objects, and grey shows a type of object being at the place for a short time or that was transparent for light to shine partially through it. I think this relates to Abstraction because you cannot tell what the main object is, and there are elements of abstraction, for example it has value/tone, because the objects overlap each other which makes it look lighter, darker and grey forming different shades. It also has shapes because there are different shapes shown in the photo, or the weird shapes were made by different sub-shapes. Also the lines in this photograph are made by objects overlapping and laying next to each other.
|
This is a photogram which was cut up to make it more abstract and also to make it less obvious of what it originally was. I made a weird shape out of it to make it look different to what the rest of the class made. I wanted to make it look different to its original standard. I just got a photogram and started cutting it up randomly from the corners and then put it together randomly.
|
This is the photogram of the cut up, the white parts turned black and the black ones turned white, so it is opposite. I think it is abstract because it has a weird shape and you can't tell what it is. I've made the shape more pleasing to what I had planned it to look like.
|
This is another photogram cut up, it has more of a square shape but you still cannot tell what it was originally or at least what the photogram represented. I cut it up in stripes and then put it together randomly so it doesn't look like the original. |
This is a photogram of a cut up, it looks abstract but you cannot see negatives or opposites going through. If I did it again I would've made sure that it could look more different. I would also check the chemicals that were put on it because it looks pink and brown and slightly mixed with other colours.
|
This is the last cut up I made from a photogram, it is still abstract as you cannot tell what it is, it sticks out and has gaps between so when I made the cyanotype afterwards it would make a different shape.
|
This is the photogram of the cut up in which nothing turned negative but I liked how bold the shape is, if I could do it again I would've made the original photogram have more white bits so it could show on the second photogram.
|
This was my final outcome. I removed some of the duotones and photograms that didn't fit together, also those that didn't correlate, for the final work to look nice when individual pieces fit. I put the photos in order of what I did. The first is the photogram we took at first. Then there is the cut-ups we made of the photograms. And after there is a print of the cut-up. Then the final one is a duotone of a cut-up I made with photoshop. I think these photographs relate to abstract because a photogram is abstract depending on what is on it and if you can see what the main object(s) is/are. It would be even better if I made it more colourful because it currently looks a little dull as I only used photograms and one duotone.
|
I think this photo related to Harry Callahan's work because he focuses on one object and in this photo you can only see tree twigs. I also tried to compare the contrast and light of the photos. Harry's photos look dark and contrasted. I made these photos on a rainy/cloudy day so there could be natural contrast. Also Harry mostly takes photos of plants and natural things so I took a picture of a tree.
|
|
Ralph lived in a rural part of the United States. Meatyard was born in Normal, Illinois. After his marriage to Madelyn McKinney, he moved to Lexington, Kentucky. The series below is called 'Zen Twigs'. He takes photos of twigs from trees. His photos have contrast and focus. I like his photographs because of the focus and darkness in his photos. It makes the twigs stand out from the background. What I found interesting about his photos is that he can make a single twig giving atmosphere and emotion.
|
I tried to take more photos linking to Meatyard's work. I tried making them dark and contrasted. I used a digital Ixus 95IS to take these pictures, they're not very good at zooming in, but it worked well with light. I think it links to his work because he took pictures of twigs and he took dark pictures. |
This was another attempt of getting close to Meatyard's work, I added more to test. This time I took pictures with more focus. There was less contrast and light. Instead of only taking images of twigs like Meatyard, I tried to expand and experimented with other natural things like birds. They would've been better if I added a black and white effect. |
|
An American photographer and modern art promoter who was instrumental over his fifty-year career in making photography and accepted art form.
Alfred takes photos of clouds mostly, his photos show texture and contrast. I like these photographs because there are no other objects apart from the clouds and there is not a lot of colour to it, which adds temperate and mood. What I find interesting is that he only takes images of clouds, but they still all look different like they were taken at different times of the day and different seasons and places. |
His photos show some differences of light. Some of his work is dark and some is light, the light in the photographs shows during what time of the day the photograph was made, but also there are many shadows. The light looks very natural but in one photograph he shows light from the street which would be artificial light. There's also value/tone in his photographs. You can see where the lightest parts of the photographs are. Some photographs have a lot of shapes. For example in the photograph with the red/yellow car, you can see the lines and the shapes the car windows made, also the light that reflects onto the car shows a shape. Most of his photographs are good in focus, with sharp and good quality; but some of his photographs have bad focus and you can only barely see the subject. There are also lines which stand out in some of the photos. The lines are easily seen in certain photos. I think the most important element would be the shape. His work is abstract because some of his images are unclear of what the main subject is. Also his work uses a lot of the formal elements.
|
|
I chose this image because I like the light and tones in it and the different shadows and lines. An unusual thing is that you can't really see much, and you can't tell what's going on outside of the vehicle, but you can see the picture as being interesting. This photo has a strong element of light, you can see there is artificial light coming from outside of the windows, the brightest lights come from the street lights and the reflection from it. There are shadows, for example the two people are basically in a shadow because it is so dark there. Everything is dark apart from the reflections and lights. You can guess that this photo was made at night. There are both reflected light and direct light, but some of the reflected light was made by light that isn't in the photo. The photo looks like it has also soft light. I think this photo is important because it represents some of formal elements. Saul Leiter's photographs are abstract because in some of his photos you can't tell what the subject is or what is going on, also his photos contain a lot of the formal elements.
|
- "I don’t plan things. As a rule I prefer to see what happens."
|
What I learn about the photographer from this video is that he is very patient, and he doesn't plan his photos. His vision is unique, and he likes catching certain moments. He can photograph the same neighbourhood for 55 years with the same light and style. He's a unique person who doesn't just join the crowd and doesn't do what everyone is doing.
|
I picked these 2 images because they both have a straight line cutting through the middle of the image. They also have more focus at the top of the image as there are more things to look at. Both images are in a portrait form and they both have similar composition.
The differences are that there are different lights, shades and lines; also there is different focus because in the first one there is also focus at the bottom of the image. They have different patterns as well, for example at the bottom of the left painting there are more scribbles and random stains, but in the right image there are lines. The photographs are also made of different colours. |
experienceThe trip taught me a lot about Saul Leiter and about abstract and photography. Going up London and taking pictures let me test my photography skills on a whole other level, because we didn't take pictures of the same things at school and I didn't take pictures of my area which I see all the time, I took pictures of something new which adapted my eye to take photographs. I also understood how to collaborate abstraction with my photography. The trip overall benefitted my photography.
|
|