Glass abstracts

I created a series of abstracts from glass art in the National Glass Museum at Sunderland yesterday (Wednesday.)Comments welcome.

[IMG]http://i799.photobucket.com/albums/yy273/Davidtrout2/Boiling.jpg[/IMG]
Boiling

[IMG]http://i799.photobucket.com/albums/yy273/Davidtrout2/Planetaryeclipse.jpg[/IMG]
Planetary eclipse.Comments appreciated.

[IMG]http://i799.photobucket.com/albums/yy273/Davidtrout2/Serenitycopy.jpg[/IMG]
Serenity

David,

Serenity hits the spot for me. You've framed it well, and complemented the face and the blue shawl with that approach. Planetary Eclipse isn't quite as exciting colour-wise IMO, and the gap between the discs at the bottom of the frame catches my eye a little too much. Boiling is great - the colour is where it's needed, and in the right amount.

Sorry David none work for me. In the first two I don't like the colours and the froth effect and the face is just that a face in what looks to me an awkward crop.

These are beautiful, David. I love abstract photography: we don't get enough of it on this site! The colours are stunning and your impeccable technique shows the subjects off to best advantage.

Regardds,

Andrew

Just as a matter of debate I don't consider these to be abstract photographs per se. The first two are shots of objects that are abstract by their nature rather than photographs that take something and make it abstract.

You've lost me Mike. If going in close to photograph a small area of a larger object to create an alternative impression is not abstract then what is?
david

The first one does it for me! Great detail and contrast. It reminds me of one of those sulfurous hot springs photos that peter (?) brought back from Yellowstone not long ago.

If it's any consolation - that's my Tutor's definition of abstract and he drives me nuts as I try to get what he wants - and rarely manage it because of my lack of ability.

Personally I like the first one , and I very much appreciate the use of colour in Serenity .

You've got me thinking now, Mike. Not something I'm used to before 10.00a.m.!

I would say it's a pattern or play of light, part of something, perhaps, maybe a distortion, not instantly recognisable for what it actually is.

Therefore no.3 of David's lovely trio is not an abstraction, whereas one and two are, I think!

But I take your point. Perhaps I label too many photographs as abstract.

Regards,

Andrew

I concede Serenity is not abstract. I should have called it surreal. But its certainly not just a record shot of what I saw. I changed the mood of the little piece of glass sculpture and worked to arrange the composition so the figure appears to be resting against a solid line as she is transposed into a dream world. Hence the framing that Mike didin't like. There now, artistic babble as opposed to some of the techo-babble we often get on this site
david

And may there be much more of it David! IMO the line / border against which Serenity rested (flowed / melted?) was part of the reason the framing worked for me.

David - hmm perhaps I was a bit sharp on the assessment of how you'd treated your subject and how your choices made it abstract rather than it being inherently abstract. I think probably the fault lies with my lack of appreciation of what the subject was and that you chose to take a small part sort of out of context to make your image.

As for serenity I think surreal is a better description (and I still don't like the crop )

@ Technoidiot - not all abstracts are of small things.

None of these are mine:

link


link

But surely they are abstracts?

Mike