“In photography, as in all visual arts, we have to distinguish between the natural design we observe and the personal design we create – by eliminating, changing, abstracting and arranging the elements of our composition. Painstakingly copying and re-creating the natural observation is mindless”    –   Harvey Lloyd                                                                            (Hello, Mr. Bateman!)








Klaus Rossler © copyright 2003-2013


As I’m going through last year’s material attempting the latest back-up, I found these images and they are a good example of traditional landscape and ex- or impressionistic interpretation.
Yes – all photography is an interpretation, and even the most realistic approach does not copy what the eye sees – and it couldn’t – and it shouldn’t. What the individual eye sees and what the individual brain perceives is another step away from any common reality. The final result, the “Mental Image”, is the result of alteration and perception by the brain … aka YOU – based on your memories, upbringing, experiences, gender, education, etc. etc. … your personality. You are your brain – or your brain is “You” (more on that next time)

But there is clearly a difference between the two groups of images here. It has to be mentioned that all, even the 3 realistic images (1, 3, 5), have non-realistic features, like long exposures, multi-exposures or the use of a ND-graduated filter. Yet 2, 4, 6  clearly depart even more, by additionally simplifying and minimalizing. A different approach, not just by technical trickery, but also through deliberate abstraction. It’s the difference that could place 1, 3, 5 , lets say, in National Geographic or in a calendar, while 2, 4, 6 could rather be imagined in an exhibition at a gallery, on a more artistic level.
And then there is not just the difference between the two groups or approaches, but also between each one. I found approximately 30 shots of that driftwood-stump, in various light and weather conditions, angles and times of the day (or night-with bears around :-)).
An additional aspect is of course the mind of the viewer – another variable of perception and interpretation. At the end there is nothing much to say, considering the countless variables of individual perception – left to be unexplained with the insufficiency and incompetence of words and language.

Klaus Rossler © copyright

your comments are, as always, appreciated

Custom Photography-Fine Art Prints-Photo Restoration-Contact:



About Klaus Rossler - Photography

•Custom Photography-creative image solutions for tight budgets ......... •Fine Art Prints-limited editions, signed & numbered, archival quality . •Photo Restoration................................................................................ •Transfer to Digital-from prints, slides, negatives .................................. View all posts by Klaus Rossler - Photography

2 responses to ““Variations”

  • Klaus Rossler - Photography

    Gruetzi!! Thanks for your likes. Don’t forget – the object is meaningless. Its the lines, shapes, colours, the light – the abstract elements of design – that make the picture. Its not important “what” it is – its “how” it is.
    The images above are from Lake Superior – es ist ein “See”. Ungefeahr die Groesse von der Schweitz!! 🙂
    Good Luck!

  • FrischeKick Fotografie

    Wow, they look AWESOME!
    I wish I had a sea nearby. But Switzerland doesn’t have one. What a pity!

    Thank you for sharing theses lovely pictures!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: