Whilst Alsels work may have been all about appearances, the remainder is not true at all. They can be opposites (certainly dont have to be), but can also be the same....the two are in no way related, I thought that was the whole point...don't judge a book by its cover etc etc?
Originally Posted by tim atherton
Appearances can be a subtle slight of hand away from reality or 'smack on'. Without this getting silly, what is reality anyway etc etc...bla bla perception...
Ansels 'appearances...or perception' are certainly readily identifiable and this could perhaps be because they match the hue of our own internal rose tinted spectacles.
I still do not think that all his images are radical departures from reality. I think this vastly overstates what he actually did, which was very simple in concept, but taken to extremely high levels.