These are tidepool shots at La Jolla, CA. I believe they are on Kodacolor 200 with Nikon F3 and 55mm macro. Negs have been lost, and these surviving prints were copied with a D7100, not scanned.
I really love these picture Pilot, they are so surreal they could be paintings, brilliant,
Geoff
Pilot 6 wrote:
These are tidepool shots at La Jolla, CA. I believe they are on Kodacolor 200 with Nikon F3 and 55mm macro. Negs have been lost, and these surviving prints were copied with a D7100, not scanned.
If these qualify as abstract it would lead one to believe the camera can be pointed at anything with the odd bit of color and the obligatory swirl and it qualifies as abstract art. Perhaps to some it does but personally I can only relate to images abstract or not that at least try to represent something and they meant something to the producer of the image so I am not sure what these natural patterns from nature meant to you when you pointed a lens at them. Did they speak to you in a way I cannot see? I cant see the plan to produce abstraction in just a point and shoot exercise.
They are pretty but is that enough?
Pilot 6 wrote:
These are tidepool shots at La Jolla, CA. I believe they are on Kodacolor 200 with Nikon F3 and 55mm macro. Negs have been lost, and these surviving prints were copied with a D7100, not scanned.
These are very appealing, and I can't figure out what they are even with your info about tide pools. They remind me a bit of Jim Hills series of corrosion patterns on dumpsters, all about textures and shapes and in this case colors. You have the extra enigma of what should be a flat surface of squares appearing to "melt" into the other elements. The first one is the more pleasing visually. Thanks for sharing them.
With abstracts I usually have an instant emotional response: oh, how pretty! Or oh, that's intriguing; I want to spend a bit more time examining. Or, oh my eyes hurt
With #1 I am intrigued to look deeper and find slightly different stories from the varied "landscape" you presented. With #2 I take as-is and say, that's pretty cool to know it's a
natural abstract and as a nature lover, I wonder about the details, whether mineral, animal, plant.
Enjoyed these very much!
Pilot 6 wrote:
These are tidepool shots at La Jolla, CA. I believe they are on Kodacolor 200 with Nikon F3 and 55mm macro. Negs have been lost, and these surviving prints were copied with a D7100, not scanned.
Very nice abstracts from nature Bob, particularly #1, well seen.
Graham
Pilot 6 wrote:
These are tidepool shots at La Jolla, CA. I believe they are on Kodacolor 200 with Nikon F3 and 55mm macro. Negs have been lost, and these surviving prints were copied with a D7100, not scanned.
The first photo appeals to me. The second does not really make an impact. I am intrigued that you were able to copy these. the colors still see vibrant and nice. Funny how abstracts work. You might see something and think it is wonderful; and then see a similar photo that does not move you at all. I'm not in Billy's boat altogether here. I don't really have to recognize something in an abstract to like it. So, thank you for posting. It gives us an idea what can be done with some of our old prints and, like I said, the first one is really nice; but the second one just doesn't, for some reason, grab me.
Erich
GWR100 wrote:
I really love these picture Pilot, they are so surreal they could be paintings, brilliant,
Geoff
Many thanks, Geoff. Looking at them takes me back to that day on the beach, among the rocks and tidepools. Wish I could revisit it!
bob
Billyspad wrote:
If these qualify as abstract it would lead one to believe the camera can be pointed at anything with the odd bit of color and the obligatory swirl and it qualifies as abstract art. Perhaps to some it does but personally I can only relate to images abstract or not that at least try to represent something and they meant something to the producer of the image so I am not sure what these natural patterns from nature meant to you when you pointed a lens at them. Did they speak to you in a way I cannot see? I cant see the plan to produce abstraction in just a point and shoot exercise.
They are pretty but is that enough?
If these qualify as abstract it would lead one to ... (
show quote)
Yes! For me it is, Billy. Somehow, I doubt that Kandinsky or Mondrian would agree. Thanks for looking and responding.
bob
minniev wrote:
These are very appealing, and I can't figure out what they are even with your info about tide pools. They remind me a bit of Jim Hills series of corrosion patterns on dumpsters, all about textures and shapes and in this case colors. You have the extra enigma of what should be a flat surface of squares appearing to "melt" into the other elements. The first one is the more pleasing visually. Thanks for sharing them.
Textures, shapes and (sometimes tones) colors. For me, that's where it's at. If I had your eye and your patience, Minniev, my efforts would be more objective. The squares puzzle me also. Many thanks for your reaction.
bob
Linda From Maine wrote:
With abstracts I usually have an instant emotional response: oh, how pretty! Or oh, that's intriguing; I want to spend a bit more time examining. Or, oh my eyes hurt
With #1 I am intrigued to look deeper and find slightly different stories from the varied "landscape" you presented. With #2 I take as-is and say, that's pretty cool to know it's a
natural abstract and as a nature lover, I wonder about the details, whether mineral, animal, plant.
Enjoyed these very much!
With abstracts I usually have an instant emotional... (
show quote)
Can't help with those details Linda, but very glad you found their naturalness to be pretty cool.----and really thankful that they didn't make your eyes hurt---or did they?!?
bob
Graham Smith wrote:
Very nice abstracts from nature Bob, particularly #1, well seen.
Graham
Thank you Graham, your comment means a great deal to me.
bob
ebrunner wrote:
The first photo appeals to me. The second does not really make an impact. I am intrigued that you were able to copy these. the colors still see vibrant and nice. Funny how abstracts work. You might see something and think it is wonderful; and then see a similar photo that does not move you at all. I'm not in Billy's boat altogether here. I don't really have to recognize something in an abstract to like it. So, thank you for posting. It gives us an idea what can be done with some of our old prints and, like I said, the first one is really nice; but the second one just doesn't, for some reason, grab me.
Erich
The first photo appeals to me. The second does not... (
show quote)
Thanks Erich. As for my hi-tech copying method, I put the print on the floor under a window and shoot down at it a few frames, hoping that I'll get one in focus with the sensor parallel to the print.
bob
I'm still reeling from the last debate on abstracts bob, so am in two minds whether to chime in or not.
OK then, my problem here is, I see a lot of similar pools where I live, so instantly recognised them as what they are - so that leaves shape, form, colour to make them abstract I guess. It doesn't do that for me as is, but with some heavyish pp could probably be made to - a good starting point I reckon.
Now get yourself prepared for a load more twaddle, a handful or two of cutting remarks, a bit of rudeness - oh, and some occasional help with the subject. Erich survived and took it all well and I'm sure you'll do likewise bob.
Frank2013
Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.
I like both of your photographs Bob.....but won't stray into the debate.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.