
“Yes, I think it is,” he boldly stated. “It is possible to ‘dance photographically’.”
Take a look at the first image I’ve attached to this article. This visual cacophony causes your eyes to move here, then there, then somewhere else again, and you keep looking for a spot to rest, but in this case, the visual music never stops! You’re locked in a continual dance of eye motion and the only respite is to opt out of the image entirely.
The deepest colors of blue at the bottom of the sculpture give a driving bass to this optical song as the lighter values emanate in splashes of color like the arpeggio’s of a flute here and the rapid run of a violin there and the top notes of a trumpet all vying for our attention at the same time.
Another option might suggest the frantic dance of a tabletop tennis match with swirling paddles and the blur of that little white orb so desperately trying to avoid yet another crushing blow.

But wait! I’ve just suggested two possible scenarios to the “photographic dance” theory. Is this art? Is it true that art is in the eye of the viewer? Has my photograph captured the very essence of that thing called “art” or is it simply a record of what I observed?
In order to answer that last question, you would have to wonder what led me to take the time to compose, expose and later enhance my image to present to you here. Will I tell you? Of course not! Art is in the eye of the observer!
Let’s explore another option. Seattle artist Dale Chihuly sculpted the original “song” at one fountain at the Atlanta Botanical Garden, but here’s my photo-interpretation of the “dance” rendered in chalk and charcoal. Did I pirate Dale’s work? Would you hang my print on your wall?
Let me know what you think! socciphoto@yahoo.com
http://home.comcast.net/~n1sailor/site/?/page/Curator_and_Artists/