Goofing around could lead to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[GuyF]

For some reason the older I get, the more tolerant I am of abstract works. Must be mellowing in old age 

Anyway, I was just messing about and thought there must be a market for giant "exclusive" prints of this stuff. Either go mass-market and sell zillions via Ikea or print out a couple of 8ft square whoppers to sell to Russian oligarchs for a few million a piece.

Just for fun, what do you think?

[candyman]

Yep, you are right.
I see this type of "art" in small art-shops where you can buy it as a poster (prox. 30 euro) or printed on canvas (prox. 60 euro)
Regarding the colors....print a color that fits with the seasons popular interior colors and you have a winner to put on the wall. Next season people buy a new one with different color since they come relatively cheap.

[traveller]

Goofing around could lead to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

What, $16? 

[GuyF]

Goofing around could lead to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

What, $16? 

Sold! Just send me the money and wait 28 days!

[sandymandy]

I remember some photo that was heavily photoshopped (and really looked like that too!) and it also sold for a million euro or such 

[Nishi Drew]

This type of photography has been and is quickly being replaced by with CG, simple abstract stuff is easy to render and there's more control over the subject and lighting blah blah. But hey, all the photographer does is carry around nice gear to location so he can click a button for the camera to make magic, right??

[Nishi Drew]

I remember some photo that was heavily photoshopped (and really looked like that too!) and it also sold for a million euro or such 

{Warning, double post}
yeah that one river or something where all people, buildings and objects were removed for a barren landscape?
If it were a physically 'doctored' film photo then I would give praise, but millions for that?? No subject, story, message or anything, what an age of photography we're in. I thought the whole thing might be some weird promotion/advertising for Adobe "Man who meticulously uses photoshop makes tons of $$$, you can too so buy our Creative Suite!"

[crasher8]

I see a Mark Rothko comment coming

[Jay Khaos]

This type of photography has been and is quickly being replaced by with CG, simple abstract stuff is easy to render and there's more control over the subject and lighting blah blah. But hey, all the photographer does is carry around nice gear to location so he can click a button for the camera to make magic, right??

Very true.. 

From the POV of a stock photo shooter (and user... graphic design is my full time gig),  I think the most profitable way to judge a photo is looking at it's thumbnail and how attractive it appears alongside others... which translates to bastardizing your photos 99% of the time. 

If you're trying to sell photos, it's true that something like pretty bokeh circles probably sells better than a rare photo of a lion in the wild taken with a $20,000+ setup, 9 times out of 10.  But... HDR the S___ out of that lion and put pretty bokeh circles behind him and you might have a winner! (jk lol)

[distant.star]

.
Yep, the older I get the mushier my brain becomes! (And I haven't even added alcohol into that mix, at least not in the last 30 years.)

[GuyF]

Whilst we're debating the pros and cons of what makes "art", I can't help noticing that in the 7hrs or so since I posted the images, the thread has been read almost 1000 times and the images opened almost 900 times each and yet no one has asked what the images are of. I'd have thought abstract images would have caused at least one person to ask, "what is it?". Maybe they're too obvious. Maybe I'm over-analysing the minds of the people who view this site. Maybe I should get out more. 

[serendipidy]

I see a Mark Rothko comment coming

+1
One of his paintings sold this year for $86.9 million USD

[danski0224]

Whilst we're debating the pros and cons of what makes "art", I can't help noticing that in the 7hrs or so since I posted the images, the thread has been read almost 1000 times and the images opened almost 900 times each and yet no one has asked what the images are of. I'd have thought abstract images would have caused at least one person to ask, "what is it?". Maybe they're too obvious. Maybe I'm over-analysing the minds of the people who view this site. Maybe I should get out more. 

I was wondering about the first image.

The other ones look like a close up of a piece of steel rod.

Care to share details?

[rpt]

.
Yep, the older I get the mushier my brain becomes! (And I haven't even added alcohol into that mix, at least not in the last 30 years.)

No wonder it is getting mushy! You have to clean all the mold out with spirit on a weekly basis! Shock and Awww man! And I am not talking Beers or Wines...

[iris chrome]

Whilst we're debating the pros and cons of what makes "art", I can't help noticing that in the 7hrs or so since I posted the images, the thread has been read almost 1000 times and the images opened almost 900 times each and yet no one has asked what the images are of. I'd have thought abstract images would have caused at least one person to ask, "what is it?". Maybe they're too obvious. Maybe I'm over-analysing the minds of the people who view this site. Maybe I should get out more. 

Well, the first one is obviously some sort of light source but I don't know what.

The second one looks to me like a macro close-up of the head of a nail.