Beamer and Ana, you guys continue to amazing me week after week.

Stained Glass is 'abstract' art AND it's "man-made".

King...
to answer your question, this image was taken at Thanksgiving Chapel. this is an unsual crop i have to admit... i think it works well for the theme.

@Tedi17...Thanksgiving Chapel in what city?

King, she's from your city. D-town my man.

That was what I was thinking...I haven't been inside. Thanks.

Yes, I agreed that this was abstract, but not accidentally as some of the other postings. And obviously, I rated it as such! Congrats! :)

@Tedi...IMHO: Visual abstract art is when the artist takes a subject/emotion/mood and creates an image that depicts that subject in a non-representational way. In the case of your image, the stained glass artist depicted the religious scenes in a non-representational/"abstract" way. The architect further "abstracted" those images by his placement of them is a receding spiral. You, sir, pointed your camera straight up and took a straight forward picture of their work. I don't believe your work in creating this image had any non-representational or "abstract" character to it.

Now that doesn't say that this image isn't abstract and certainly it is man-made. I just don't feel your work is abstract work.

I do offer congrats on the feature. Keep in mind, Relevance is only 1 of 5 rating categories and obviously your image received high marks from most, including me, if I remember my rating were very high for impact, composition and image quality, lower for relevance and technique.

I would be curious what comments you feel have been so "amazing". I looked back and generally I have been mostly complementary of your work. I supposed I could just revert to speed rating or 2 word comments. i.e "Great shot!"

@Beamer...if you apply a slightly looser interpretation of "abstract," then all two-dimensional representations of three-dimensional objects are abstractions, especially as the photographer usually has to elect where the edges of the frame are, what to include (that which is abstracted) and what is excluded.

As usual, we have to settle on our own interpretations of the Theme of the Week, some of which are more problematic than others.

Thanks for all the votes.

Art/Photography is all about the indiviuals interpretation of the subject. More importantly, does that individual have anemotional attachment to your work.

Abstract can be either 2D or 3D, right?

I believe 100% this is 'abstract' and 'man-made' PERIOD!

I'm not focused on the "Architecture Design", just the theme 'Man-made Abstract'....which states:

We have had Natural abstract so why not a man-made abstract, the difference here is that the subject needs to be either manufactured, built or made by man and not nature.

BTW - if it's MAN-MADE it's someone eles' work. Or, maybe I'm confused.

Again, I thank everyone.

@Tedi...the first words(letters) I wrote were "In my humble opinion" which agrees 100% with your statement about individual interpretation.

Second, I said that the subject IS abstract and IS man-made, so we agree 100% on that.

I also said that I rated your image very highly and congratulated you on the feature. I'm sure that we agree 100% on this image being deserving of peer praise.

I am glad we have so much we agree on!!

Where we seem to differ is on the question of this image being relevant to the brief of this Theme. What I tried to say was that in my OPINION your contribution to the creation of this image was not abstract in nature, therefore, not on brief.

Remember that this all started when you seemed amazed that I would have an opinion on a peer review website that would disagree with your opinion. I honestly thought the intent here was to offer opinions about the images regardless of agreement/disagreement, but rather based on personal interpretation.

@Beamer...I'm not sure, but I have a hunch that English is not Tedi's first language. I think there is some miscommunication because of the language/culture thing.

Tedi...please correct me if I'm wrong. I have tremendous respect for the fact that many W.S. participants are not native English speakers, but communicate so well in English.