Sunday, 17 January 2010


Ceiling shapes, Manila, January 2010

Is shape sufficient to be the subject of a photography and it still be interesting?


  1. Well, Mark Rothko seems to get by rather well with just solid colors. Then again, he's a painter, I guess.

  2. As did Mondriaan and a host of others, but indeed they weren't photographers.

  3. I have been following this discussion and think we are getting into some semantic weeds. As to your picture, which by the way, I like very much, it has a subject: ceiling shapes. Photography is, to my way of thinking, nothing but subject. The photographers choices in presenting the subject determine if the picture is abstract, representational, documentary, banal or beautiful.


I like comments, especially constructive ones.
Comments get emailed directly to me before publishing , so if you want to get in touch drop a comment.
All comments moderated by me before being published, keeps the spam at bay.