Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

I've been overseeing the Architecture Photography gallery for a couple of months now and often I would stumble upon deviations of abstract architectural patterns and details that I'd like to feature, but which would turn out to be submitted under Photography > Abstract & Surreal > Abstract. I never dared to move them, because they were indeed Abstract and it would be the artist's choice to submit them either in the Abstract & Surreal category or in any of the proper Architecture sections. 

As these days I was doing some more research for the upcoming projecteducate week that will focus on Architecture Photography, I started to seriously question myself whether the Architecture gallery was indeed lacking a Photography > Architecture > Abstract sub-category. I believe the abstract architecture style is pretty strongly developed within the community, as it is a very personal and creative way of capturing architecture. It allows a great variety of results with a strong visual impact.

So to explain it to you a little better, if this sub-category was to be added, I would most likely describe it as:
Photographs in which a building, through clever use of composition and camera angles, is not actually recognizable as such. The result is a graphic image constructed purely from lines and shapes.

Here are a few examples:
To infinity and beyond IV by mitazu08 Curves by zuckerblau Mes souvenirs de recif by LeMatos Paragon by FxSanyi Fortress by rubberman542 bibliothek 3 by Ivan-Suta

I should remind you that the current Architecture sub-categories are defined according to the nature of the main subject photographed: Bridges & Suspended Structures, Exterior of a building, Interior of a building, Statues & Monuments. Unlike the mentioned sub-categories, this new one that I'm suggesting is not about what is photographed, but about how it is photographed and the visual impact it creates.

Now I'd be all for this addition, but I need to know your opinion! Here are some questions that you could ask yourselves:
  • Is there a need for an Abstract Architecture sub-category, or should these photographs be submitted in Abstract & Surreal?
  • Will people really have the reflex to check out the Architecture gallery in their search for Abstract photographs?
  • Should the Architecture gallery stick to its current division according to the nature of the central element photographed, or does it allow for a style-related sub-category as well?
  • Will this new sub-category be relevant enough, or will it overlap with the currently existing ones?

I'm really looking forward to hearing your opinions on this! Even if the suggestion happens to be relevant, it won't be implemented unless the community (and that means you!) finds it necessary. So please comment below with what you have to say on the topic and feel free to leave any other suggestions that you might have!


:new: Update!


Two days into the discussion, and I already read many opinions on this matter! Thank you! I'm going to try to recap your feedback so far and introduce you to the new turn that this discussion has taken.

So most of you consider that an emphasis on 'architecture' in an abstract photograph would defeat the purpose of Abstract or, basically, that the object is of no importance whatsoever in an abstract photograph. People should only see the non-figurative, graphic outcome. I have to agree with this. For more on this topic see: comments.deviantart.com/1/3094…

Some others went further to suggest that, if Architecture would have an Abstract sub-category, one should also be added to Animals, Plants & Nature, or to Macro photography or many others. But that would basically go against the purpose of Abstract, as stated before, and would put an end to the Abstract gallery in general. Do people care about what's portrayed in an abstract photograph? Probably not. That means that browsing through figurative categories, such as Architecture, in order to reach for abstract works wouldn't make much sense.

But at the same time, I still think the Architecture category would need a sub-category for close-ups, details, that don't really find their place in Exterior or Interior photographs, which imply something wider. Think of doors, windows, patterns... little elements that don't necessarily look for an abstract visual impact, but just zoom on the small things that compose a building and gives it a human scale.
These are a few examples of what I'm talking about:

Japanese Lanterns by rubberman542 Kamon by rubberman542 bahnhof stadelhofen by Ivan-Suta Misendeavor Regretter by sputnikpixel

  • Do you think these should remain in their existing categories with all the Exterior and Interior photographs, or do you believe there's a need for an addition of a Photography > Architecture > Details gallery?
  • Is a 'Details' addition to the category really essential, or do these photographs find their legitimate place in the current divisions?
Please join/continue the discussion! :heart:



Is the Architecture Photography gallery lacking a Architecture > Abstract sub-category? Please read this article and join the discussion.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconhughharan:
hughharan Featured By Owner Jul 23, 2012  Student General Artist
Details would be a good addition to the architecture section. Irrelevant but related in the fact that some expansions would be nice!

...In descriptors on the ID widget I find it annoying that I can't call myself an architecture student as such, "I am an Artist(maybe not)...Student...VARIED?!!?"
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jul 23, 2012  Student Filmographer
I agree with you. I'm an architecture student as well and enlisted myself as 'Other'. But at the same time I don't think architects see themselves as artists, even though it does imply a lot of artistic input.
Reply
:iconevelivesey:
EveLivesey Featured By Owner Jun 24, 2012  Professional Photographer
Yes - add it :-)
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 29, 2012  Student Filmographer
Thank you for your input! :)
Reply
:iconevelivesey:
EveLivesey Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2012  Professional Photographer
Most welcome - I love doing abstractions :-)
Reply
:iconanoya:
Anoya Featured By Owner Jun 24, 2012   Photographer
I also like the 'details' as a sub-category, especially with the examples you posted =)
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 29, 2012  Student Filmographer
Sweet! Thank you, smexeh! :heart:
Reply
:iconrockstarvanity:
RockstarVanity Featured By Owner Jun 22, 2012  Professional Photographer
I like the idea of Photography > Architecture > Details rather than a specifically Abstract sub-division :nod:
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 22, 2012  Student Filmographer
Sweet! Thank you for your input! :heart:
Reply
:icontarantulaldamn:
TarantulaLdAmn Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
I like the idea of 'details' sub-category.
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
:w00t:
Reply
:iconfxsanyi:
FxSanyi Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
I agree with ^DpressedSoul. When I take my shots and prepare my deviations I constantly have the abstract output in mind. I try to make my photos less architecture than abstract, but sometimes it is more architectural than abstract and I choose the adequate category. I don't know if that makes sense or not. Anyway, I understand your point of view also, since I also am frustrated that I have to browse a totally different category to find some abstract works, but a change would further increase the chaos in my opinion. Some change should be made, but the one you suggest, in my opinion, doesn't solve the problem.
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
Thank you for your comment! :) Would a 'Details' sub-category be more pertinent? I tried to discuss more in detail in the following replies: [link] and [link] I'd like your opinion on that! :highfive:
Reply
:iconfxsanyi:
FxSanyi Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
I don't know if that's a good idea either. Two different ways of approaching photographs are at collision here: subject and method. Someone mentioned this not long ago and I like the idea very much: why not categorize every photo this way. You should be able to chose your topic (architecture, people, nature etc) and the method used (macro, abstract, surreal, still life etc). This also has its problematic, but maybe would help solve this dual approach.
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
Considering that a complete system change is not under my area of influence, I'm trying too look for the best options for the submission system that we already have. :) I understand that this suggestion would probably make things easier, but it should be rather discussed in the #hq blogs.

And about the subject — I don't think that a building and a window are exactly the same subject. If we can separate photographs of the exterior of a building and the interior photographs (it's the same building, thus same subject according to your definition), I don't see why we wouldn't be able to separate Exterior photographs from Details? :)
Reply
:iconfxsanyi:
FxSanyi Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
You are absolutely right. I withdraw my last comment; and on second thought, Details and Abstract could mutually exist. Lets see if anyone has a better idea than this.
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
:nod: I updated the journal in order to sum up what has been said so far and orient the discussion towards the new question that arose. :)
Reply
:iconmaddlouise:
MaddLouise Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Interesting thought. I think that if you were to create the sub-category of abstract architecture, you may have to do the same for macro and/or nature abstracts. Maybe instead of having architecture's sub-category of abstract, you could create sub-categories for abstract photography such as nature, architecture, objects, macro. Yet again, that would kind of be defeating the purpose of abstract. :shrug: Therefore, I find this idea to be unnecessary. It's the discreation of the artist to categorize their photograph as such. Most of the time I think the artist should just categorize it as abstract as it's being portrayed as such.
I apologize if I'm reiterating what someone else has said, I've yet to read any of the comments.
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
There are many of those who reacted that think the same way, and I have to agree that Abstract photographs have to remain abstract. Another suggestion that came up within the discussion is that maybe there's need for a 'Details' sub-category instead. Read more about it here: [link] & [link] and feel free to join the discussion about that! :)
Reply
:iconadinatan:
adinatan Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012
I have a radical suggestion... Allow photographs to belong to more than one category ! (similar to a word tagging system)
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
Well that goes way beyond my capabilities, but you can suggest changes in the #hq blog posts. $danlev will be able to read them and bring them up within the staff team if necessary. :D
Reply
:iconfxsanyi:
FxSanyi Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
I like your idea very much. Give deviants the possibility to put their works in two categories.

Maybe dA should change its whole approach to categories. The subject and the manner in which photographs are taken are two different things. This is what causes the contradiction here; which is more important for the artist/work: the subject or the method?
Reply
:iconrandallstuartpeik:
randallstuartpeik Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012
I love your suggestions and ideas here. I think it is fabulous and forward thinking of you to begin this category. I have often taken pictures that would fit right into this category, but that look out of place in our traditional categories. We must start to think about abstract as it relates to all the arts. This is way overdue. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Student Filmographer
Thank you for taking your time to read the article and react to it! :)
Anctually ^DpressedSoul, who oversees the Abstract & Surreal Photography gallery has written a very well argumented comment here: [link]
I invite you to read through that and see if you still think there's need for an Abstract Architecture sub-category.
From all the discussion so far, I believe a new question arose, since many think all abstract photographs, be it of a building or something else, should remain in the Abstract & Surreal gallery. So the new question is: "Would we need then a 'Details' sub-category instead?" because the all current details either go into Architecture/Exterior, Architecture/Interior or Abstract galleries. More on the topic here: [link]

Your input is much appreciated!
Reply
:iconrosleinrot:
RosleinRot Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012   Photographer
I think an abstract subsection would be okay...I'm just not sure how relevant it would be. I'm sure people would continue to submit to abstract & surreal, despite the change.
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Student Filmographer
Well I think many could find a place for their deviations in there, but from all the discussion a new question arose: Would the Architecture Gallery need a 'Details' sub-category instead? Just so it doesn't overlap the existing Abstract Gallery and people can place there their deviations of architectural details, which nowadays are (in my opinion wrongly) submitted under either Interior or Exterior. I encourage you to join the discussion here: [link]

Thank you for your time and your input! :)
Reply
:iconrosleinrot:
RosleinRot Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012   Photographer
Yes! I think a details sub-cat would be a good idea. :)
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Student Filmographer
:thumbsup: Thanks!
Reply
:iconsaniakob:
SanIakob Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Since abstraction in photography is just a "concept" because abstraction doesn't really exist due to the fact that photography needs reality to exist and an "abstract photography" is just a cropped part of a real object... at the end there would be no abstract photography category....because they are bastractions based on architecture, or nature, or bodies, or objects.... if the macro CV, the nature CV and so on take their related abstractions to their respective categories... there would be no abstract photography category at all ....

You should observe the basic concept behind the image.... I think "arquitecture photography" is a "figurative" kind of photography where architecture is shown as such... like a photography of a commercial product... if the image is based on showing just abstraction (even though it is based on architectural objects) the main concept is no longer showing architecture but plastic elements and the image goes to another level.... just because in some part of the process a building was usted, doesn't mean that everything IS "architecture photography"
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Student Filmographer
I understand your point of view, it tends to be the same at ^DpressedSoul's one. I wrote him a more extensive reply about my opinion on abstract architecture photographs, you can find it here: [link]
It would be good if you contributed to what I said in there, as well as maybe think if there's a need of a 'Details' sub-category instead? Thank you for your time! :)
Reply
:icontrippy4u:
Trippy4U Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012
1. Is there a need for an Abstract Architecture sub-category, or should these photographs be submitted in Abstract & Surreal?
I think there are already too many categories on DA...but just when you need one it isn't there. Abstract & Surreal is painted with a broad stroke but I think that well covers the art form. Another sub would lead one to think why isn't there an Abstract Landscape, Abstract People, Abstract Sky, etc category too.

2. Will people really have the reflex to check out the Architecture gallery in their search for Abstract photographs?
Probably not.

3. Should the Architecture gallery stick to its current division according to the nature of the central element photographed, or does it allow for a style-related sub-category as well?
I think they aren't too interested in Abstract Architecture images. But I don't know for certain because I don't really follow the Architecture category.

4. Will this new sub-category be relevant enough, or will it overlap with the currently existing ones?
I have been collecting these Abstract Architecture photos for a long time and have always placed them in my Abstract/Surreal folder because I don't think the artist's intent with them is to just take a record shot of how something was built. They are much more expressive than that. Its a fine line that they cross though if handled poorly by the photographer. It could be viewed as a detail of another person's work...that being the architect or the sculptor for the statue & monuments. I shy away from taking those sort of shots for just that reason. The photos you've shown on the link are w/o doubt more about abstract than they are about architecture I feel.
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Student Filmographer
I read through your answers and I'd like to thank you for taking the time answering all those questions! :) I would tell you about my opinion on abstract architecture photos, but I already did it here: [link] You can read that, if interested.

So far, out of all the feedback I got, I think the question leans now more towards maybe adding a 'Details' sub-category instead. Find out more about it in here: [link] I encourage you to join that discussion and let me know what you think! :)

Thanks again for your input! :highfive:
Reply
:icontrippy4u:
Trippy4U Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012
This was so well stated by you, "So abstract architecture photographs make abstraction of what's portrayed, that's true, but paradoxically it also goes to a building's essence." :clap:
I'm for the "Details" category you suggested :thumbsup:
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
Thank you! :thumbsup:
Reply
:iconnilanja:
Nilanja Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012
abstract means nonrepresentational, so the object is not important. why would we need than an extra category for abstract architecture photos? sure there are a lot of these photos on dA but for me abstract is not about what the object is, it is about creating something...yeah abstract^^ it should give the viewer certain emotion, convey an atmosphere, but not the impression of a building or whatever
an abstract photo makes more of the object :D
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Student Filmographer
Thank you for taking your time and joining the discussion. I understand your point of view and I have to agree about that. I detailed some more about where my suggestion comes from in this reply here: [link]

I admin Abstract would be a tricky addition to the existing Architecture sub-categories. Some suggested we probably need one titled 'Details'. What's your opinion on that one? :) More about it here: [link]

Thank you for your input! :thumbsup:
Reply
:iconnilanja:
Nilanja Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012
details..hmmm.
but then you have to decide if you want to submit to architecture/details or abstract...
personally I think we don't need an extra folder^^ because there are already so many...
and like I said: abstract is abstract, no matter what it is about^^
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
Well details don't necessary have to be abstract. For example, when I submitted [link] I didn't want it to be in Abstract, because I didn't really see it to be as such. It just shows a detail of the interior of a building under a new angle. It might make people wonder what the hell that is, so it joins the idea of abstraction, but to me, as a future architects, it is more of a beautiful architectural detail than just an undefined pattern/shape.
In the meantime, I don't see it belonging to an Interior photograph, so I still believe it is misplaced — thus my wish for a Details sub-category. It could also include doors, windows, small parts of a building that don't necessarily are abstract. A few examples to illustrate what I mean: [link] [link] [link] [link] - they're all either in Exterior or Interior, but I don't think they really belong there according to those sub-categories' definitions, do they?
I also think it would be still better to give artists' a choice, but we need to find out if people find it necessary. :)
Reply
:iconnilanja:
Nilanja Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012
I see what you mean :nod:
and I also see a difference between details and abstract hahaha xD

now I am really unsure about what the best is^^
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
Well now that we settled that Abstract is not a good option, the question would only be to add a 'Details' sub-category or not? :shrug:
Reply
:iconnilanja:
Nilanja Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012
yeah I think so^^
I think it would be ok to add one and you also have some serious reasons for it!

but you have reached another thing: I really wanna shot something abstract now xD
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
I think ^DpressedSoul will be glad to hear that! :lol:
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconelysabet:
elysabet Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Maybe instead of adding a subcategory to Architecture, add one in Abstract & Surreal? The problem of course is that there the subcategories are Abstract and Surreal, but then again, you could change the subcategories in things like Architecture, Nature, Water and Other . It is quite radical, but you don't always have to leave everything the way it is because it's a hard job changing it. It starts revolutions ;)
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Student Filmographer
One of ^DpressedSoul's arguments states that in Abstract photography the subject has no importance, thus the concept of abstraction. And I have to agree with that, thus making your suggestion tricky.

I mainly suggested this for the Architecture category because there are a lot of deviations that would bring it to life as abstraction is used a lot in architecture photography, and not so much in the other categories.

Thank you for taking part in the discussion! :)
Reply
:iconelysabet:
elysabet Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
I see your point, but then again, if the subject has no importance, there is no reason to submit it in architecture either anyway, is there?
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Student Filmographer
Yep, that's what a part of those who answered think. :)
Reply
:icon1510:
1510 Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I wondered about it while submitting this one - [link] but decides to go with abstracts instead architecture. but also on this - [link] I got a lot of questions (a lot really) on what is this, even category clearly says it is architecture.

But, overall I do not believe it is needed. Abstract is abstract, no matter if subject can be more obvious (but not always) when it comes to architecture. What would be next? Nature -> abstract...?
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Student Filmographer
What about a 'Details' sub-category? Do you feel there's a need for one or things are great as they are now? :)
Reply
:icon1510:
1510 Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
well, there you might be on right track :)
Reply
:iconananaszynska:
AnaNaszynska Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
Would you personally find a use in that or you'd continue to submit them to Abstract?
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

:iconananaszynska: More from AnaNaszynska


Featured in Collections

News I Support by namenotrequired

JOURNALS AND NEWS by Elandria


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
June 19, 2012
Submitted with
Sta.sh Writer
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
3,974 (1 today)
Favourites
11 (who?)
Comments
126
×