Frozen In Time

I really like photography, but it can be extremely lacking. For instance, in this picture, are these bubbles actively effervescing or actually frozen? Were they moving when I took the picture or not? Either way, the act of taking a picture freezes it, taking away information. Sometimes this lack of information is beautiful, but other times it isn’t good enough. I could embed a two second video of this phenomena, but as we currently know video, this would look stupid. How can this void be filled?

This photo isn’t the best example, but there needs to be space between still and moving. I guess a description of the picture could sort of alleviate this, but combining straight up reading with more ‘abstract’ visualization becomes jarring. Then you could take the whole problem further, and demand feeling , taste, etc. be integrated into art. It often is, but like I said, to limit information can lead to beauty.

2 Comments

  1. Pappa
    Posted February 3, 2009 at 8:03 pm | #

    If you notice great art is something the viewer interprets and does not require an explination. Your interpratation is good, but let the art or photo art leave the interpratation to the viewer.
    Great work.

  2. Pappa
    Posted February 3, 2009 at 8:05 pm | #

    Comment on the lavender picture was ment for this picture. Both are excellent pictures. Time to put together an album.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>