Tek wrote:

> I'm kinda hesitant about making such a sweeping criticism, but I've
> seen this in a lot of images posted here: Personally I don't think the
> use of text in an image can be considered minimalist, particularly not
> if we're talking about anything as complex as an entire 5 syllable
> word (or a digital encoding thereof).
> 
> My reasoning is pretty simple: minimalism is all about reduction to
> the simplest possible form, and the letters of the alphabet are
> elaborate and complex from a visual point of view compared to the base
> forms we find in ray-tracing: spheres, boxes, etc.
> 
> If you want to use text perhaps present it in a context where text is
> the most minimal form, e.g. on an old-school green on black computer
> screen.

I don't know anything about the definition of minimalism but while
reading your statements, the following comes to my mind:
One could use minimalist objects such as spheres, boxes or pixels to
create something complex like text.

Post a reply to this message