MobiColour MobiColour Challenge #251 July 19-Aug 1 Theme: Story

F3588673-D178-4526-8227-8B62B183E89A.jpeg


The tale of a lonely heart
Apple cam, Photos
 
Just thinking aloud, if the image is static, like @rizole's library, or my traffic cone, there really isn't any narrative aspect, apart from maybe the reason for them being there in the first place. So that would mean virtually anything could have a story.
The category I've always had trouble defining is Still Life. A friend who was a painter said that painters he knew never used that term, but eventually he worked around to saying that a still life painting is entirely encapsulated within its frame and doesn't refer to anything outside that. It has light, color, and shape, but no suggestion of any movement. Maybe the opposite of that is the narrative aspect, when an image brings you to think about something outside the frame, either spatially or temporally. So your traffic cone image is static, yes, in that there's no implication that it's falling, for example, but it does lead me to think outside the frame (how did it get there and why, etc.) But when I look at WOTANICUS' desktop still lifes, my mind doesn't automatically reach outside the frame to wonder what's to the left or right or how the object got where it is, and so on. It's just the thing itself.

Eh, probably not any help, but that's how I try to work it out for myself.
 
The category I've always had trouble defining is Still Life. A friend who was a painter said that painters he knew never used that term, but eventually he worked around to saying that a still life painting is entirely encapsulated within its frame and doesn't refer to anything outside that. It has light, color, and shape, but no suggestion of any movement. Maybe the opposite of that is the narrative aspect, when an image brings you to think about something outside the frame, either spatially or temporally. So your traffic cone image is static, yes, in that there's no implication that it's falling, for example, but it does lead me to think outside the frame (how did it get there and why, etc.) But when I look at WOTANICUS' desktop still lifes, my mind doesn't automatically reach outside the frame to wonder what's to the left or right or how the object got where it is, and so on. It's just the thing itself.

Eh, probably not any help, but that's how I try to work it out for myself.
yep - my Still Life studies are inspired by the dutch painting school of the renaissance eras, which strived fir an almost photographic realism in their style. The 'Set Table' genre mostly consisted of foods - fruit, luxury items like good wine, grapes, rare meats etc on the finest silverware or crystal. Essentially they were a way to demonstrate wealth and status, saying "look what ive got - so much food and drink I can afford to let it stand around for a week, while a famous artist paints it" So from that point of view its sll about whats sat before you to admire, the tones and textures and the realism. Theres no actual narrative going on, its just showing off.
 
The category I've always had trouble defining is Still Life. A friend who was a painter said that painters he knew never used that term, but eventually he worked around to saying that a still life painting is entirely encapsulated within its frame and doesn't refer to anything outside that. It has light, color, and shape, but no suggestion of any movement. Maybe the opposite of that is the narrative aspect, when an image brings you to think about something outside the frame, either spatially or temporally. So your traffic cone image is static, yes, in that there's no implication that it's falling, for example, but it does lead me to think outside the frame (how did it get there and why, etc.) But when I look at WOTANICUS' desktop still lifes, my mind doesn't automatically reach outside the frame to wonder what's to the left or right or how the object got where it is, and so on. It's just the thing itself.

Eh, probably not any help, but that's how I try to work it out for myself.
No, its a great help Ted, nicely put.
 
The category I've always had trouble defining is Still Life. A friend who was a painter said that painters he knew never used that term, but eventually he worked around to saying that a still life painting is entirely encapsulated within its frame and doesn't refer to anything outside that. It has light, color, and shape, but no suggestion of any movement. Maybe the opposite of that is the narrative aspect, when an image brings you to think about something outside the frame, either spatially or temporally. So your traffic cone image is static, yes, in that there's no implication that it's falling, for example, but it does lead me to think outside the frame (how did it get there and why, etc.) But when I look at WOTANICUS' desktop still lifes, my mind doesn't automatically reach outside the frame to wonder what's to the left or right or how the object got where it is, and so on. It's just the thing itself.

Eh, probably not any help, but that's how I try to work it out for myself.
Amen. Also ‘bravo’ , :thumbs: and :notworthy:
 
Back
Top Bottom