| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/28/2005 03:31:43 PM · #1 |
If you have to ask what a pix is in the Minimalism challenge, then is it minimalistic since the pix does not give alot of info, or is it Abstract?
Curious.
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 04:12:01 PM · #2 |
When I'm reading poetry, particularly with an audience not accustomed to the ways of it, it often happens that someone asks me what the poem is about and what it means. I consider it a legitimate question and therefore answer it as honestly as I can.
This might be what I'd say, depending if the speaker is sincere or a cynical sophist:
ΓΆ€ΒΆ "I don't know. As a poet, I make poems. All I can say is that it is one, which is more than I could, honestly, have said of it, a few decades ago. To me, it is an esoteric document and a song which I can feel, make and enjoy and, possibly, study. What it is about, I can't say. What is a stone about or a tree? What are you about?"
and to the cynic:
ΓΆ€ΒΆ "I'm not a mythical sage or a brujo. I'm just a poet. When you buy a fresh loaf of bread from a baker, do you ask him what bread 'means'?"
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 04:45:53 PM · #3 |
so if a pix is just a pix without the info that most pix provide, it is minimal? or do you need the comfort of a label?
without the label then it should be minimal, but to get the whole pixture then the pix is no longer esoteric. Is this correct?
Message edited by author 2005-04-28 16:46:04.
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 04:56:50 PM · #4 |
|
|
|
04/28/2005 05:18:36 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:
so if a pix is just a pix without the info that most pix provide, it is minimal? or do you need the comfort of a label?
without the label then it should be minimal, but to get the whole pixture then the pix is no longer esoteric. Is this correct? |
I'm not sure what you mean by label. If you're referring to an image title, it does not necessarily provide info, as you say. It may just charge the image, and it may do this also by removing any possibility of ascribing any addenda.
If you refer to the challenge title, as a catagory, well, no point considering this, as we have no control over what the challenges are called and how they're further described.
Minimalism is an art movement, which has inspired a very different and casual application of the term in areas which have nothing to do with the context from which the term was drawn. This is a problem which has led to some controversy and a good amount of confusion here, as several recent threads on the topic can attest.
In other words, your questions are simple enough. But to answer them usefully, in the context of this challenge, is somewhat challenging, to say the least. ;-/
Message edited by author 2005-04-28 17:19:04.
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 05:38:53 PM · #6 |
Ok, so if bread is bread, and you know its bread, but it only takes up 1/4 of a frame then that is minimal.
What if you just see a grain of the bread, a macro of the dynamics of the bread, but it takes up 2/3 of the pix, is this still minimalism?
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 05:46:58 PM · #7 |
|
|
|
04/28/2005 05:48:47 PM · #8 |
not according the wording of the challenge description.
if i had come up with this particular description - i would have named the challenge 'negative space'
Originally posted by :
What if you just see a grain of the bread, a macro of the dynamics of the bread, but it takes up 2/3 of the pix, is this still minimalism?
|
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 05:50:11 PM · #9 |
so minimalism is in fact not just negative space, but also the lack of information. Is this correct?
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 05:55:11 PM · #10 |
go to www.google.com
and type this in
define: minimalism
edit: don't forget the colon
read the ones relating to art movements. best to vote according to the actual challenge guidelines than the true definition of the term though.
Message edited by author 2005-04-28 17:56:37.
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:03:46 PM · #11 |
thanks soup, I just learned a new trick with google. My favorite. thats why I have gmail.
So, a discription of minimalism would be this;
Minimalism A nonrepresentational style of sculpture and painting, usually severely restricted in the use of visual elements and often consisting of simple geometric shapes or masses. The style came to prominence in the late 1960s.
This discription was found @ www.ackland.org/tours/classes/glossary.html
So when people are looking at a pix, then they should consider this definition, and not be quick to assume that negative space is the only way to do minimalism.
Is this correct?
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:07:35 PM · #12 |
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:08:47 PM · #13 |
I don't think that's a definition, I think it's a description. Minimalism, being an artistic idea, does not have a definition.
As a description, it is largely accurate, but not completely so.
Minimalism can be, in fact usually is, complex.
It uses small amounts of information, but asks us to give those small amounts greater weight. |
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:14:31 PM · #14 |
another definition I found from google.
minimalism
A movement in American painting and sculpture that originated in the late 1950s. It emphasized pure, reduced forms and strict, systematic compositions. found @ www.members.aol.com/GRBowles/art-hist/mod-periods-def-nypl93.html
So your saying the more complex a pix, with certain amounts of info is minimalism. Which bread pixture would you subscribe to then? the loaf of bread taking up just a 1/4 of a pix, or the dynamics of grain within the bread that took up 2/3 of the pix.
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:16:09 PM · #15 |
Spare in appearance and restrained in mood, minimalist art emerged in the 1960s. The term can refer to the extreme simplicity of a work of art or to the suppression of detail and gesture in favor of a rational, at times machine-made quality.
www.nga.gov/education/american/aaglossary.shtm
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:21:48 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:
thanks soup, I just learned a new trick with google. My favorite. thats why I have gmail.
So, a discription of minimalism would be this;
Minimalism A nonrepresentational style of sculpture and painting, usually severely restricted in the use of visual elements and often consisting of simple geometric shapes or masses. The style came to prominence in the late 1960s.
This discription was found @ //www.ackland.org/tours/classes/glossary.html
So when people are looking at a pix, then they should consider this definition, and not be quick to assume that negative space is the only way to do minimalism.
Is this correct? |
Well, negative space has nothing to do with minimalism. Neither is the rudimentary definition you cite sufficient to come to grips with a good, workable understanding of what it actually was and still is. There is a historical context, an interest in which can shed much light on the matter.
Minimalism was a rebellion against or, perhaps, a facit, its practioners drew from expressionist works in particular and from a convention of seeing and rendering that had preceded it over centuries.
In lieu of a long post, I'd describe as antipolar to a Baroque stance and attitude toward the world. To me, the very idea of aesthetics is questioned by this movement (possibly as a redundant aristocratic relic).
In other words: no pretty pictures, no grand beauty, no decor, no portraits, no sentiment and, god forbid, no portraits. Minimalism is about objects, the machine, democratic socialism, architecture, materials... that sort of thing.
Message edited by author 2005-04-28 18:22:45.
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:22:26 PM · #17 |
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:27:15 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
[quote=swinging_johnson_v1]
In other words: no pretty pictures, no grand beauty, no decor, no portraits, no sentiment and, god forbid, no portraits. Minimalism is about objects, the machine, democratic socialism, architecture, materials... that sort of thing. |
I concur zeuszen.
Rex, whatever. Get a life.
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:30:04 PM · #19 |
i need help.....is it fair to rate a picture a 1 just because you dont understand it....it meets`the challenge criteria...but viewing it you just "dont get it"
what do you guys think??? |
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:32:08 PM · #20 |
ya know buzzmom, if you think that your work is good enough, run with it.
In the end, those that know will have the power, those that don't want to learn will be the bullys in the back of the bus.
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:35:50 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:
so if a pix is just a pix without the info that most pix provide, it is minimal? or do you need the comfort of a label?
without the label then it should be minimal, but to get the whole pixture then the pix is no longer esoteric. Is this correct? |
I'm confused. Are you looking for meaning or context? What info do most pictures provide? I thought the information was supplied by the viewer.
Using Zeuszen's poetry analogy, the poet doesn't provide the meaning, the reader does. the same holds true for photos.
d
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:36:52 PM · #22 |
Is this about the definition of minimalism? Sounds familiar. ;^)
What's minimalism?
Minimalism ideas...
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:38:44 PM · #23 |
| you know i keep claiming to thick skinned but as we all know we all talk a great game and pout insilence....i feel my entry deserves about a 4.5 in the end if that .but thats not the point. it was just a strange statement to find...gee i wonder if ill check off that it was helpful......NOT...and btw where do you sign up to be in the forum crasher club???? i think i may have found my niche...as opposed to clique...oh sorry different forum...hey but i killed that one too for a while |
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:39:07 PM · #24 |
Thread hijacking is actively discouraged. I'm sure the commenters like Rex and kpriest are aware of this and were just having a little fun. Thanks for the laughs, guys, now onto respecting thread content and no more hijacking! :)
|
|
|
|
04/28/2005 06:39:33 PM · #25 |
I guess context for me within this forum, but definition, meaning for all others that have no clue.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/19/2025 06:05:47 PM EDT.
