Abstraction
Working definition:
When you look at an abstract image, you cannot tell right away what the subject matter is.
(This is not a perfect definition, for several reasons. For example, there are photographic distortions that may not be particularly abstract. Furthermore, sometimes the lack of identifiable subject matter might simply be a matter of incompetence (!): lack of focus, strange viewpoint, etc. Another point in doubt: Must there be, in fact, some identifiable "subject matter" at all in abstract images?
Other "big ideas" related to abstraction: these are not necessarily intended to be true (certainly not universally true) assertions, but are, rather, provocations: See if you think these are true statements.
Abstractions show outer reality, but "made strange."
Abstractions use subject matter not so much for its own sake but in order to reveal or convey something of the artist's inner (emotional?) state, or to create a particular emotional state in viewers. (cf. the "equivalence" ideas of photographers such as Alfred Stieglitz and Minor White.
Some picture-making strategies and techniques that may often relate to abstraction:
- taking something(s) out of context
- using unaccustomed and extreme angles and perspectives: This relates to the notion of taking something out of context.
- using lenses of long focal length: This also relates to the "out of context" idea, as well as to the idea of aiming for strong positive/negative shape composition. Long focal length lenses tend to flatten out space, sometimes making it appear that things far in the background are in the same plane as things quite close to us. This pretty much amounts to being able to juxtapose elements in unusual ways that don't quite conform to the way we normally perceive objects in space. Using a long lens often allows one to emphasize patterns -- e.g., in repeated building forms or elements, such as windows.
- creating close-ups (so that the viewer doesn't see the accustomed "whole" thing, but just a part: this is a form of "taking out of context"
- finding and emphasizing patterns (To the degree that one finds a pattern in a subject, the visual dominance of the pattern might take precedence over our awareness of the subject matter. And because many patterns and types of patterns are relatively universal (e.g., branching patterns, which are present in many different kinds of things and on many different scales in nature and in the built landscape), if you find and show a certain kind of pattern in an object or arrangement, it's quite possible that viewers will tend to ask themselves whether the pattern belongs to A, B, C, or . . . (etc.!), where they've seen such a pattern before
- printing and/or lighting: For example, by silhouetting (backlighting etc.) an object or arrangement, one reduces the amount of textural information (and perhaps obscures distinctions between various parts of the object or arrangement. One can imagine making "new" and visually/conceptually obscure and mysterious shapes by silhouetting a number of objects, each mundane in itself, but combining into this new super-thing when backlit and juxtaposed.
- simplification: The above example, involving silhouetting or backlighting, is in fact a good example of simplification. By getting rid of textural cues and information about interior boundaries and contours of an object, one simplifies the object and makes it less readily identifiable. High contrast printing can move us in a similar direction.
- changing the tonal scale (e.g., printing in negative form, or shifting tonalities around as one can by using infrared film and a red filter, for example; solarization comes in here at some point)
- using slow shutter speeds to create various kinds of blur: This is one way of bringing out aspects of an object or scene that would not be seen by the unaided eye. Camera vision is not identical to human vision, and the way film (or digital sensors) can record an image over time is one difference. A number of photographers have worked with slow shutter speeds when photographing moving elements, such as reflective objects (water with ripples, automobiles with lots of chrome, and so forth). One might also experiment with intentional movement of the camera, such as various types of pan or rotation.
- purposely using a lack of focus (perhaps best if it is an extreme lack of focus): By throwing subject matter completely out of focus, one can make the subject matter obscure. In order for the result not to just look chaotic, formless, and horrible (or, at the least, horribly uninteresting), two things are probably necessary: 1) the scene needs to include subject matter that is rather simple and that would, normally, be readily recognizable due to its shape; 2) there must be strong value contrast between the subject matter (the main shapes of the photo) and the background.
[Question: Does all abstraction involve simplification? Some people would probably say so. During our classroom discussion, some students suggested that, while simplification might describe what's going on in visual terms, the thought process triggered by (and perhaps involved in the creation of) an abstraction might actually involve complexification!]
Simplification can be related to reduction. I pointed out, during our discussions, that all 2D representational images reduce three dimensions to two and are therefore (in a somewhat bland and meaningless way?) "abstract." I went a step further and suggested that black and white images are perhaps more abstract than color images, as they involve the reduction of color to value. Some of you pointed out (wisely, I believe) that black and white photography can often (because of the reduction or simplification involved?) be more emotionally moving and engaging than color photography.
- choice of subject matter: Some objects or scenes seem to organize the picture themselves: the structure of a plant, for example, becomes the structure of an (abstract?) photograph of the plant. Composing in such a way that the plant fills the frame might be one good strategy to use in order to take advantage of such objects. This is because, as parts of the plant touch the frame, you'll be creating some interesting negative shapes.
Creating compositions where both positive and negative spaces are of nearly equal importance may be an effective strategy for abstraction, perhaps even more so in cases where the amounts of positive and negative space are nearly equal. In such cases, one begins to create a visually ambiguous situation, subject matter becomes harder to discern, and pure visual design starts to take over.
Important questions for further thought and investigation, and with a few speculative suggestions:
What draws someone to an abstract image? -- aesthetics, mystery, curiosity, novelty . . . ?
What do we learn from abstractions? -- they help trigger connections -- may not teach us anything we can put into words, but can prompt us to see with fresh eyes
Does "abstraction" have an opposite (i.e., an antonym)?
Important note:
While it may well be possible to create abstract photographic prints from "normal" (i.e., non-abstract?) negatives, for the purpose of this assignment you are required to create negatives that are, in themselves, already "abstract." That is, you cannot depend entirely on after-the-fact darkroom manipulation etc. to create the sense of abstraction.