Minimalist Photography and Negative Space

[greatgrandma]

At some point, someone looked at this photo of mine

and made a remark comparing it (favorably) to the work of some famous photographer that I never heard of and said it was minimalist. Looking minimalist up on line it seems that it often has negative space, which I understand as space that doesn't have a lot of detail in the majority off it but does have some outtanding subject. It didn't look like from the examples on line that it had to be without color, or with muted colors. So I wonder if Levina's crow would be minimalist and have negative space.

Would these photos of mine quality

• TOSHIBA PDRM5
• ƒ/3.47
• 1/480s
• ISO 100

• NORITSU KOKI QSS-32_33

• NORITSU KOKI QSS-32_33

• Canon EOS REBEL T3
• EF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II
• ƒ/5.6
• 51mm
• 1/80s
• ISO 500

 

[Darren75]

I have no opinion to share on the matter but I do like the images.

 

[Darren75]

Although minimalistic, doesn’t that mean there’s hardly anything in the picture?

 

[inphoto]

I too don't know about minimalist, but their mood is extraordinary! Well done!

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

I too thought that minimalistic is exactly that: with very little in the frame. Like so:

Or this:

 

[greatgrandma]

I too thought that minimalistic is exactly that: with very little in the frame. Like so:

Or this:

Can there be some texture in the background - like

• Canon EOS REBEL T3
• EF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II
• ƒ/5.6
• 34mm
• 1/100s
• ISO 100

• EASTMAN KODAK CPANY KODAK DX6490 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA
• ƒ/7.1
• 63mm
• 1/1000s

• NORITSU KOKI QSS-32_33

(Both of these 2 are sand)

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

I find it very hard to get to a definition of what minimalist photography really is. I always thought it was just very little in the frame, not much in the background either. But I don't know.

I looked on the internet and there seems to be a kind of consensus that "minimalist photography is about stripping a subject down to its most elegant essence. Create photos that cut through the clutter by emphasizing the essentials, including clean lines and empty spaces" (quote from Adobe).

I found a site called digital-photography-school.com with a "Comprehensive Guide to Minimalist Photography". They too say that "minimalist photography, also known as minimalism photography, is a type of image-making that relies on simplistic compositions, heavy use of empty space and elimination of clutter".

They go on to say that minimalism can be applied to pretty much every genre of photography, including portrait, landscape, still life, architecture, and even street shooting. But minimalist photos do have a few key characteristics:

• Negative space. Minimalist photos tend to feature lots of empty, or negative, space. Negative space is composed of expanses of pure color or texture, such as a broad stretch of ocean or a grassy lawn. (And featureless white skies are a minimalist staple!)
• A small main subject. Minimalist compositions keep the subject small in the frame so that they’re dwarfed by negative space. As I discuss below, this can be done with a wide-angle lens or by shooting from a distance. In cases where the main subject isn’t small in the frame, it should be exceptionally simple (e.g., a few streaks of paint on a wall).
• Limited clutter. Minimalism emphasizes simplicity, and minimalist photos tend to feature a main subject, lots of empty space, and nothing else. Minimalist photographers carefully refine their compositions until no extra elements – such as poles or telephone lines in the background – exist. The more clutter you can eliminate from your shots, the more minimalist they’ll be.

Is this helpful?

Are the last images you posted examples of minimalist photography, Rosalie? I don't know. Maybe. Probably.

 

[fotoi]

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

View attachment 57464

This is definitely minimalist photography. A great example, John.

 

[fotoi]

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

View attachment 57712

Another great minimalist photo!

I have another herbs pic that probably qualifies.

• Canon EOS 5D
• EF50mm f/1.8
• ƒ/4
• 50mm
• 1/5s
• ISO 200

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

• Canon EOS 5D
• EF50mm f/1.8
• ƒ/2.8
• 50mm
• 1/400s
• ISO 1000

 

[Ed Will]

My apologies for being late to this thread--I'm spending most of my days in bed and the rest of the time in a bit of a fog. Consequently, forgive any following thoughts/comments that may produce a "huh?" or "WTF" from you. Also, some lovely photos that people have posted in this thread. Here is my take on minimalist photography and negative space.

First of all, negative space. Negative space is more than just "there isn't much in the background." Negative space is one in which the space emphasizes the subject. Often this is done through contrast. The positioning/crop of the subject is often critical (like a person entering a dark room or an object headed off in to a dark void or a beam of sunlight into a cavern). The point is: negative space is more than just a blank background. That negative space often emphasizes the form and shape of the subject.

Here's an example of a portrait by Gavin Hoey (Adorama) that I think makes the point about how the positioning of the subject makes the negative space both emphasize her but also make us wonder what she's staring in to.

To me, a minimalist photo or approach is one where there is no background (or minimal one) and the subject dominates the picture. And unlike negative sace compositions it might take up the entire photo. Imagine a high-key head and shoulders portrait--that could be minimalist yet not negative space. Not all minimalists photos are high-key, that's just easies to illustrate. Here's a fashion headshot of Angela Jolie I pulled off the internet. Not really a lot of truly "negative space in this photo but because it's so high key, it emphasizes form in the subject (her curves and distinctive features). I wanted to posts an example from one of the old Pirelli calendars of a woman's lips with lipstick but am too tired to search for it--sorry.

So how do these two compositional elements fit? Think of a ven diagram. Not all negative space composition is minimalist. Not all minimalist compositions utilize negative space. But often times there is some shared elements (a minimalist photo may have negative space).

To me, this is the classic of classics when we're talking about a photo that is both negative space and also minimalist compositionally. This is by Marcin Ryczek.

Sorry I couldn't use any of my own work to illustrate this but I'm too tired to wade through my poorly cataloged photo library. Anyway, that's my take (for what it's worth).

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

My apologies for being late to this thread--I'm spending most of my days in bed and the rest of the time in a bit of a fog. Consequently, forgive any following thoughts/comments that may produce a "huh?" or "WTF" from you. Also, some lovely photos that people have posted in this thread. Here is my take on minimalist photography and negative space.

First of all, negative space. Negative space is more than just "there isn't much in the background." Negative space is one in which the space emphasizes the subject. Often this is done through contrast. The positioning/crop of the subject is often critical (like a person entering a dark room or an object headed off in to a dark void or a beam of sunlight into a cavern). The point is: negative space is more than just a blank background. That negative space often emphasizes the form and shape of the subject.

Here's an example of a portrait by Gavin Hoey (Adorama) that I think makes the point about how the positioning of the subject makes the negative space both emphasize her but also make us wonder what she's staring in to.
View attachment 57730

To me, a minimalist photo or approach is one where there is no background (or minimal one) and the subject dominates the picture. And unlike negative sace compositions it might take up the entire photo. Imagine a high-key head and shoulders portrait--that could be minimalist yet not negative space. Not all minimalists photos are high-key, that's just easies to illustrate. Here's a fashion headshot of Angela Jolie I pulled off the internet. Not really a lot of truly "negative space in this photo but because it's so high key, it emphasizes form in the subject (her curves and distinctive features). I wanted to posts an example from one of the old Pirelli calendars of a woman's lips with lipstick but am too tired to search for it--sorry.View attachment 57731

So how do these two compositional elements fit? Think of a ven diagram. Not all negative space composition is minimalist. Not all minimalist compositions utilize negative space. But often times there is some shared elements (a minimalist photo may have negative space).

To me, this is the classic of classics when we're talking about a photo that is both negative space and also minimalist compositionally. This is by Marcin Ryczek. View attachment 57732

Sorry I couldn't use any of my own work to illustrate this but I'm too tired to wade through my poorly cataloged photo library. Anyway, that's my take (for what it's worth).

A most excellent post, Ed. And very helpful in understanding what "negative space" and "high key" really mean in photography. The wonderful samples you posted demonstrate what the terms mean very well.

I watched a lot of Gavin Hoey's tutorials on YouTube during the years I was experimenting with stuff and doing tabletop photography (big word for what I did). Always loved him. Whenever I wanted to learn some technique or see how something could be achieved I would look if he made a video about it. Often he had. So I'm delighted you mentioned him.

Thank you so much for the write up, even when you're this ill. It is much appreciated.

Now go back to bed, sleep, rest, get better!!

 

[RichardB]

At some point, someone looked at this photo of mine

View attachment 57344
and made a remark comparing it (favorably) to the work of some famous photographer that I never heard of and said it was minimalist. Looking minimalist up on line it seems that it often has negative space, which I understand as space that doesn't have a lot of detail in the majority off it but does have some outtanding subject. It didn't look like from the examples on line that it had to be without color, or with muted colors. So I wonder if Levina's crow would be minimalist and have negative space.

Would these photos of mine quality
View attachment 57345View attachment 57346
View attachment 57347
View attachment 57348View attachment 57349
View attachment 57350

Great thread, Rosalie!