Digital BW, The Print

I think there is more than one valid usage of the word abstraction 
that's getting mixed up here.

The first, the one that I believe Austin is using, is the idea that 
there's a continuum from representation<<-->>abstraction. In this sense, 
a photograph surely lies near the representational end of the spectrum.

The other usage is the idea that anything that isn't "reality" in the 
philosophical sense, is an absctration of reality. In this sense, a 
photograph is necessarily an abstraction, because it's two-dimensional, 
colorless (in this context), etc.

In the first usage, it's common to refer to "Abstract Art"; in the 
second, saying "Abstract Art" would be redundant.

-Jason

hogarth1x wrote:
> You can disagree all you want, but just because you don't like the
> definition of a word doesn't make its definition invalid. You are
> misusing the word "abstraction" and applying your own Austin-centric
> definition. Argue with the OED if you think the definition needs to be
> changed to suit you.
> 
> Since you refuse to use accepted definitions, your argument is
> meaningless.