Victoria Again! How I abstracted what I saw!

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Guys,

I introduced you to Victoria previously here (http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3199).

I obviously took further pictures. Here I am forming an abstract vision of my experience. That's my goal. Here's the start of the process.

First the picture as taken, only simple Adobe RAW processing that's all!

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/2007_OPF_AK/Asher Kelman_2007/_MG_4075original.jpg


Now I cropped and rotated the image.

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/2007_OPF_AK/Asher Kelman_2007/_MG_4075croppedandRotated.jpg

Then I used the Find Edges filter in CS2

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/2007_OPF_AK/Asher Kelman_2007/_MG_4075_Findedges.jpg

and then blended this layer with the underlying layer.

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/2007_OPF_AK/Asher Kelman_2007/_MG_4075Face final.jpg

Here we have not gone the route of removing color or reassigning color to B&W. This approach, I use here, is more whimsical than B&W. This modification just takes us away the apparent reality of the orginal. We no longer have to study "her reality" as a B&W rich image might demand of us. This context is more relaxed and this allows my mind to explore other possibilites.

Just thought I'd share. :)

Asher

[Edward Bussa]

The filter emphasizes the patterns in the dress and the bow around her waste, gives her freckles, de-emphasized texture on the face and emphasizes her smile.

Interesting how the filter blocks out the shadow/light pattern to the point it doesn't seem like a shadow but a part of her clothing now...

[Klaus Esser]

Hi Asher!

I really like those delicately placed copyrights . . . :-) :-)

let the first shot as it is - it´s very athmospheric!

best, Klaus

[Nicolas Claris]

let the first shot as it is - it´s very athmospheric!s

I second that!

[Asher Kelman]

I am still concerned that one person posted an abstract picture of a flower and received a comment that it wasn't "abstract". I feel that exploring "abstract" images is a good idea.

"To abstract" means, to me, "to extract from" and it refers to a creative process by which some "essence" of something is taken and then used to somewhat represent it, usually in a different medium.

Now, as Klaus has kindly recognized, the first image is very interesting. However it's not as yet abstract, although it is creative. One can think of many possible meanings or implications.

The creative extraction of some essence goes much further. This requires much experimentation with each image and may be trite and of no importance to the photographer or anyone else.

One has to be careful that your picture is not on a doomed pilotless plane crashing into the sea with an emergency announcement, "This is only a test, this is only a test, this is only a test, this is only..........."

IOW, one still needs to a pilot and a creative imperative.

I too prefer the first picture with the eyes masked by my copyright warning. :) For the abstraction, I like my 4th but I'm still exploring.

Asher

[Klaus Esser]

Hi Asher!

"The creative extraction of some essence goes much further. This requires much experimentation with each image and may be trite and of no importance to the photographer or anyone else."

I think i see what you mean. But not every motive (?) is good for "abstraction". In my eyes motives are more suitable the more "flat" or "bold" they are - i think your actual motive is too dimensional.

That´s of course my very oersonal opinion ;-) .

You made a beautyful picture - why "abstract" it? The essence i feel in this picture is the girl in the light - her body-language, the light/shadow-situation and the dimensionality of the room.

All that is lost by "abstraction". What i - personal - would try to change is to make her more slim around her hips and eliminate the white band in her back.

best, Klaus (sorry my direct words . . ;-) )

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Asher!

"The creative extraction of some essence goes much further. This requires much experimentation with each image and may be trite and of no importance to the photographer or anyone else."

I think i see what you mean. But not every motive (?) is good for "abstraction". In my eyes motives are more suitable the more "flat" or "bold" they are - i think your actual motive is too dimensional.

That´s of course my very oersonal opinion ;-) .

You made a beautyful picture - why "abstract" it? The essence i feel in this picture is the girl in the light - her body-language, the light/shadow-situation and the dimensionality of the room.

All that is lost by "abstraction". What i - personal - would try to change is to make her more slim around her hips and eliminate the white band in her back.

best, Klaus (sorry my direct words . . ;-) )I'm not sure what you mean by "Motive" Klaus?

However, I know I have to do work on the first picture as you have pointed out. There is no point, BTW, in being anything but direct! I appreciiate feedback. Besides if one gives it out one has to take it too! :)

I did start on her upper back and ran out of time. So I have to tackle that and it's worthwhile.

Asher

[Klaus Esser]

"I'm not sure what you mean by "Motive" Klaus?"

i mean the kind of what you photographed: the scene, the object, the sujet?
We call it "motiv", like "motif".

"and it's worthwhile."

YES - absolutely! It´s a really beautyful shot.

best, Klaus

[Georg Baumann]

Apart from that, WOW! I could look at her face all day long....

Fire, water, full of life, calm, sadness, wicked humor, searching and so much more.... absolutely mindblowing stunning!

LOL, I did not know you have such beautiful people in BH. <grins>

[Georg Baumann]

http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/images/smiles/3d-Shock.gif

Pheew.... I just saw that first thread you referred to.... There is hope for this world, there is definately hope for this world! <smiles>