Ball – © John Neel

I believe that abstraction for the sake of abstraction probably has little to do with anything – especially art.

Art needs a motive that elevates it from the ordinary and the accidental. Intention is part of what gives art value. Intention is part of the creative process. It is an idea that is presented aesthetically – although, not necessarily beautiful.

IMO In the scheme of things, art is abstract enough on its own. It doesn’t make sense to produce abstraction that has nothing to say.

That doesn’t mean that form, light, texture, pattern and color are not important. They are always important. But there is a fine line that defines what will work as an acceptable abstraction and what ends up as being more or less mindlessness.

Abstraction is actually a means of making a gesture. It is an art that provokes a response that works on the imagination. Abstraction like other great photography acts as a trigger for contemplation. As with the rest of the fine arts, its purpose is to arouse a sense of something more complex, more profound, and more perceptive.

Abstraction as with the any true artistic endeavor, is meant to provoke the viewer. It is meant to spark the imagination, it begs for an answer, it compels contemplation, it may have something to reveal.

While the majority of what some call abstraction may be beautiful and fun to make, it probably has little to do with making real art.

The good in looking for the abstract is in the seeing of reality.

NOTICE of Copyright: THIS POSTING AS WELL AS ALL PHOTOGRAPHS, GALLERY IMAGES, AND ILLUSTRATIONS ARE COPYRIGHT © JOHN NEEL AND ARE NOT TO BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM THE WRITER, THE PHOTOGRAPHER AND/OR lensgarden.com. THE IDEAS EXPRESSED ARE THE PROPERTY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHER AND THE AUTHOR.