Mark, Thanks for your thoughts on this.
Your phrase "Eliminating all but the steel and shadow" raises a
problem -- the idea of shadow. There are two meanings at play here.
One meaning depicts a three dimensional region of space, as when,
during an eclipse of the moon, we say that the moon has entered the
earth's shadow. Meaning that the shadow region is a filled tube
extending into space and the moon has moved into that tube.
The second use of shadow is what we notice when that tube strikes a
surface, and we say that we see the earth's shadow on the moon.
We can't see the tube; we only see the surface and "the shadow". So
I understand the steel, but by keeping the shadow, what did I really
keep? Hmmm. . .
-yoram
On Sep 2, 2010, at 7:07 PM, Mark Harris wrote:
My thoughts on this weeks submissions:
Yoram Gelman - Shadow Abstract II
As one who photographs real objects in an abstract way, I like this
image very much. Eliminating all but the steel and shadow you have
created a photograph that is recognizable but still non-
representational. When I show my abstracts and someone asks what the
subject is I feel I've succeeded. OBTW, I usually ask what they
think it is first before I'll answer.
