Forms, Shapes

[Fool]

can a form, image exist without contrast?

 

[Cacotopia]

what do you mean ? like the absence of shadow? or the absence of light? You won't be able to see it but it can still exist. Like holding an object and walking into a closet and turning the light off. no light, = no available contrast. Object still exists

 

[Cacotopia]

Or are you talking art wise? I would say yes. it can you don't need to display a light source perse. you can draw what the light and the absence of light create without filling in the value of darkness they make. No tones required yet source of light can still be determined.

 

[Cacotopia]

You can paint in texture with one color to create an image without contrast, look into Rothko paintings, as awful as I think they are personally he uses in some of his work little to no contrast, yet objects within can still be found. What determines you being able to see is the source of light on the painting which alters your perception of what you can see within the strokes of the brush on the canvas.

 

[Fool]

what do you mean ? like the absence of shadow? or the absence of light? You won't be able to see it but it can still exist. Like holding an object and walking into a closet and turning the light off. no light, = no available contrast. Object still exists

yes, but i'm talking more about overall physical contrast and not visual alone. in other words if there is no contrast in texture, density, color would there be any differentiation?

case in point, you have a ball of red clay. it appears as one thing but then you divide the ball of clay in to two balls. the contrast would be the space between the two, although they came from the same ball. in appearance they seem separate but actually they came from the same source. you could in fact shape them differently but obviously they are the same ball of clay simply formed in different shapes. their contrast would be twofold at this point, one would be the space between and the second would be their structural differences.

space is not actually empty but more like invisible. it actually has some physical phenomena to it. it is simply different from the other physical phenomena that surrounds it and vice versa. the differences is in physical structure; which lends contrast from one medium to the other.

 

[Fool]

You can paint in texture with one color to create an image without contrast, look into Rothko paintings, as awful as I think they are personally he uses in some of his work little to no contrast, yet objects within can still be found. What determines you being able to see is the source of light on the painting which alters your perception of what you can see within the strokes of the brush on the canvas.

so here you're using the idea of contrast with color; which comes from the same source; being light in this case.

 

[Cacotopia]

You are not defining what contrast is in your question. can images exist without contrast. Contrast of what. color or light? objects in reality may exist without contrast, simply being unable to see something doesn't mean it does not exist. When you can experience it with other senses.

 

[Cacotopia]

So what you are asking? Is can you produce an image without contrast, texture, or light. No. with the new parameters.

 

[Fool]

You are not defining what contrast is in your question. can images exist without contrast. Contrast of what. color or light? objects in reality may exist without contrast, simply being unable to see something doesn't mean it does not exist. When you can experience it with other senses.

1690s, "to set in opposition with a view to show the differences; to stand in opposition or contrast; to set off (each other) by contrast," from French contraster (Old French contrester), modified by or from Italian contrastare "stand out against, strive, contend," from Vulgar Latin *contrastare "to stand opposed to, withstand," from Latin contra "against" (see contra) + stare "to stand," from PIE root *sta- "to stand, make or be firm."



Middle English had contrest "to fight against, to withstand," which became extinct. The modern word is a 17c. re-introduction as a term in fine arts, on the notion of "to exhibit differences or heighten effect by opposition of position, form, color, etc." Related: Contrasted; contrasting; contrastive.

 

[Thief]

can a form, image exist without contrast?

no

 

[Fool]

no

is this what the absolute would be like? the universe as a whole being a dynamic thing, chaotic?

 

[Thief]

well.....kinda hard to say....I AM!
with nothing to show for it

and then difficult to deal with the extreme solitude

so....it's give and take
light and shadow
hot and cold

and you can say ....no
to anyone you want to

then change your mind and say ....yes

chaos?.....as long as reality holds

 

[Cacotopia]

An image may exist but cannot be detected without the light to reveal it. is that the answer you want?

 

[Cacotopia]

Contrast is a principle of art. When defining it, art experts refer to the arrangement of opposite elements (light vs. dark colors, rough vs. smooth textures, large vs. small shapes, etc.) in a piece so as to create visual interest, excitement, and drama

 

[Fool]

An image may exist but cannot be detected without the light to reveal it. is that the answer you want?

i'm not necessarily looking for a specific answer but you have helped me to understand that contrast is more than just visual. obviously it would have to be sensory in all areas to be undifferentiated.

thank you for sharing

 

[syo]

can a form, image exist without contrast?

no. Chaos is the contrast.

 

[Thief]

no. Chaos is the contrast.

I cannot agree

follow this....
with pencil, dot a paper in three random locations
draw in the triangle
label each corner.....1,2.....3,4.....5,6

mark one more point inside the triangle at random

roll one cube of dice

measure from the first internal point toward the corner chosen by the roll
mark a point halfway there

repeat until you can't stand it any more

but if you can do so at great length you will see an emerging pattern
triangles
many different sizes
many overlaid over many others

but ALL have the same proportions as the original

chaos has been granted status as a science

 

[Valjean]

Or are you talking art wise? I would say yes. it can you don't need to display a light source perse. you can draw what the light and the absence of light create without filling in the value of darkness they make. No tones required yet source of light can still be determined.

View attachment 23766

The lines of the sketch contrast with the paper. The image wouldn't be visible without this contrast.

 

[Cacotopia]

I cannot agree

follow this....
with pencil, dot a paper in three random locations
draw in the triangle
label each corner.....1,2.....3,4.....5,6

mark one more point inside the triangle at random

roll one cube of dice

measure from the first internal point toward the corner chosen by the roll
mark a point halfway there

repeat until you can't stand it any more

but if you can do so at great length you will see an emerging pattern
triangles
many different sizes
many overlaid over many others

but ALL have the same proportions as the original

chaos has been granted status as a science

that would not be chaos, since you are rolling rondom numbers within a governed system.

 

[Cacotopia]

The lines of the sketch contrast with the paper. The image wouldn't be visible without this contrast.

I realized that but in the OP the original statement contrast is not clearly defined I could do that same drawing on black paper. since graphite and black are similar, without a definition of what he is asking that particular drawing would work.