Understood Willie - I was going by the definition of this particular topic on this site which is "Create an image where your subject is the strong point of the image, but only occupying a very small portion of the image space."

Sher,

You are correct!

I must say that this Topic's definition of minimalism is unique to this site. I know of no other art history definition or art classification/taxonomy that discusses minimalism as defined in this Topic.

In fact all other examples of minimalism really don't have subjects!

For instance: "Minimalism - A twentieth century art movement and style stressing the idea of reducing a work of art to the minimum number of colors, values, shapes, lines and textures. No attempt is made to represent or symbolize any other object or experience. It is sometimes called ABC art, minimal art, reductivism, and rejective art." (www.artlex.com/ArtLex/m/minimalism.html)

And:

"Minimalism, New York, 1960s, Though never a self-proclaimed movement, Minimalism refers to painting or sculpture made with an extreme economy of means and reduced to the essentials of geometric abstraction. It applies to sculptural works by such artists as Carl Andre, Dan Flavin, Donald Judd, Ellsworth Kelly, John McCracken, Robert Morris, Richard Serra, Tony Smith, and Anne Truitt; to the shaped and striped canvases of Frank Stella; and to paintings by Jo Baer, Ellsworth Kelly, Robert Mangold, Brice Marden, Agnes Martin, and Robert Ryman. Minimalist art is generally characterized by precise, hard-edged, unitary geometric forms; rigid planes of color—usually cool hues or commercially mixed colors, or sometimes just a single color; nonhierarchical, mathematically regular compositions, often based on a grid; the reduction to pure self-referential form, emptied of all external references; and an anonymous surface appearance, without any gestural inflection. As a result of these formal attributes, this art has also been referred to as ABC art, Cool art, Imageless Pop, Literalist art, Object art, and Primary Structure art. Minimalist art shares Pop art’s rejection of the artistic subjectivity and heroic gesture of Abstract Expressionism. In Minimal art what is important is the phenomenological basis of the viewer’s experience, how he or she perceives the internal relationships among the parts of the work and of the parts to the whole, as in the gestalt aspect of Morris’s sculpture. The repetition of forms in Minimalist sculpture serves to emphasize the subtle differences in the perception of those forms in space and time as the spectator’s viewpoint shifts in time and space." (www.guggenheimcollection.org/site/movement_works_M...

However, your point is well taken. I didn't follow the instructions! I realize I was in error to post images that do not contain subjects in this Topic. I was so excited to have venue for my minimalistic photos I never read this Topic's description. My bad.

After you have a chance to read this I'll delete these images.

Regardless of the definition of minimalism here or elsewhere Willie - it is how YOU interpret it yourself. Dont let me (or anyone else for that matter) ruin your excitement! If YOU feel your photo pertains to this topic, then it does. I might offer that you yourself suggest the topic of "minimal art" or something named as you feel appropriate, and put your own definition there. That way when your topic is voted on, you will have the venus for your photos! Please don't delete your image here. You have started a wonderful conversation and I would hate to see that lost!

beside definitions: I like this picture and the sort of minimalism in it.

I agree with willie 901 about the definition, it kinda stumped me too! However, I'm going to disregard it and use willie's, and also mine, idea of minimalist and comment to that idea. So, in this regard, this image works for me as three bands of colour showing some texture. I like the idea of it.

cute couple. great DOF

Beautiful symmetry.

Good eyes to see this image.

love the symetry and light here...great mono

somehow the frame doesn't work for me....and the focus being at the end of the boat throws too large an area out. The light is very nice though....

For me it's just: boring. There's no excitement, nothing special, just two roses. Sorry...

veronicalynne,

thanks for the comment!
Glad that you liked it.

JENRIKS,
No worries.
To each his own opinion.
I like the shot you don't no biggie!
That's why i post them here to see why its not that exciting to others!

Well done Mike. It doesn't excite me because DOF or because DUO. What excites me so much it's that piece of building in the background. No matter what it is. It gives third dimension to the photo: Flowers, Building, Sky. That the reason I love it

I agree with Jenriks. I looked at your other images and feel you are a better shooter then this image.

chefron,
I can understand where you are coming from!

ikol22,
Different from your typical flower shot, thus the reason for posting!

Thanks for the critiques.

Well, I'm not really sure about this one. The mix between b&w and color, the composition with the blurry effect.
Original pictures look pretty good and I have to say I'll prefer so see each picture alone.
But as I say, it's all personal taste (I like having one focus point in pictures).

I think: successfull combination!

I think the effect would have been a bit starker if they had both been done in B&W.

It looks like it could have been a great shot without the second image.

Personally, I agree with Chino and mikeock about the color variation. I think one or the other would have been best. The thing that I really find distracting is the way the poor guy's head is chopped off with the waves above. Sorta makes him look like a bald cancer survivor.

I hope no one jumps up on that seat!

Ouch!

Thanks for your comments; it's a scanned picture (sorry for the dust).

Quite funny pic lol, well done indeed !!

I like the picture! Really caught a great moment!

:-))) so funny!

look at that doodle!! so cute!

Very much agree with Brandon. I do like feeling off-balance with pics, having fun with the out of ordinary. But such a small DOF and so much blur on the left would justify a square crop. Contrast too high? This actually doesn't look like an out-of-frame effect, right? Wall behind the planter is really bright / blown out.

@brandon: it's a nice crop, but for me the flowers are to much in focus. i like the big dark area, because you don't know what's behind the awakening.

but, thank you for the critique comments.

Quite interesting... Like the subject but there's a problem with framing : i think it deserves a little pore more part on bottom but you had to be a little bit further and your dof wouldn't be so good.
Blown areas didn't close your frame too...perhaps with black borders.

love the colour treatment!

The subject borred me
but love the focus

and the tones !!

taikrixel
can you elaborate on what you meant about the lines? thank you

i like the kind of "Cross" effect - make this image very effective - nice post-processing (color and textures) and framing (sorry I have *no* negative point here to add :)

I like the lighting. Great time of day. Unlike the others, I would have preferred a little less DOF, emphasizing the rust just a tad more. I do however, like the lefthand corner blur of colors.

Like Veronica said maybe less DOF, but really nice indeed

nice composition!

Beautifully done. I love the brilliant color of the orange. =)

fine composition!

I agree with previous comment !
no mpore to say, exactly what I feel with your photo :)

Sorry, she is my wife, so it has been so natural give evidence to her.
Roberto

I probably would have colored the man sleeping on his knees, because it's first instinct to pick him. But I like how you did it too. Makes my eyes scan down the picture and the rest of the people just seem to slowly blend into the picture. Especially the man in the right top corner. Hope that makes sense. Nicely done! :-)

Interesting. I enjoy the comments. At first glance I thought she was the only woman and that perhaps was the reason for singling her out. then I looked more closely and realized that there may infact be another woman in the photo. I think the selection of the woman at the bottom (as you've done) or perhaps the man at the top is selective. I would like to see the b&w lightened up a bit so that it contrasts more with the color.

I like what you did. I do understand its your wife, so definitely must please her:) But it'd also be good to try some of the others. Who is selected can really change the mood. If she were looking at the camera and she were color to me it'd be like she came alive while the rest are frozen, but nothing about her body language sticks out...