In response to The Daily Post’s weekly photo challenge: “Ornate.”
I like the thought of ornate but it just isn’t my style. When I think of what most people consider ornate I think of churches throughout the world with gorgeous architecture. When you go inside, you find a history surrounded by great artistry. To me this definition of ornate is history, past times, over zealous art work that has no place in my world. I am a minimalist, a person who doesn’t like clutter of any sort clouding my space. I love to look at old architecture, to visit, to imagine, to reflect on the lives lived when these lavish churches were built with such great care. I don’t care for it in my own personal space.
To me ornate is a great photograph of nature, a display set with care of the product being sold, gorgeous flower arrangements, and lovely sunsets. Fruits arranged just right, a lot of color with the beauty shown without too much fuss. A smiling face, an animal that is running, playing, or exploring. That is the ornate I like. It comes down to a person’s viewpoint and taste.
The photo gallery below shows elegance in a way that I can relate to. Uncomplicated, but resplendent. Colorful, but not over-elaborate. My taste, which certainly will be different than others. Therefor, it is just a matter of perception.