Research Expression: The origin of innovation in creating of an artwork is the use of unknown factors and utilization of a novel concept that has not been observed or thought out until the artwork appears in the traditional context. With the advent of modernity in the eighteenth century, the exotic elements in Western art, as well as the strange-like elements (strangeness) in non-Western art, due to the initial acquaintance of easterners and local natives with modern art, the artwork appeared very effectively as the origin for the emergence of innovation and creativity. In the process of the occurrence of understanding of the artwork by beholder, according to the principles of the ontological philosophy of understanding in modern hermeneutics, the presence of two elements of familiarity and alienation, and according to hermeneutic expression, “the familiarity and the strangeness” in the context of tradition is the occurrence of conception process. In creating the artwork, the artist may not follow the traditional authority to which he/she belongs. It also happens that the beholder reacts differently to the artwork due to different linguistic and intellectual traditions, and therefore the horizon of understanding, predicting and expecting when obtaining the meaning is different from what the artwork opens up to it, and as a result, the beholder has treated the artwork as a “strange” element. Here, in simple terms, the intellectual horizon of the artwork, which naturally arises from its reference tradition, is different from the intellectual horizon of  the beholder, which has a different history, tradition and understanding, and as a result, the process of understanding the work is somewhat formed differently. Hans-Georg Gadamer considers any occurrence of understanding or conception in a work (as a historical context) as the result of the presence of “familiarity” or “strangeness” in the process of understanding. Tradition is the subject of familiarity, and historical distance and differences in the hermeneutic horizon are the causes of strangeness in the process of any understanding or conception. In a general conclusion, the relationship between beholder and the work (and also the artist) and tradition, and the way of opening the understanding to the artwork can be explained as follows: A) beholder and the work are both in a “linguistic and historical tradition”: familiarity with the work; B) The unfamiliar beholder with the tradition in which the work was created: the alienation and strangeness of the work; C) Disobedience of the artist to the common understanding in his historical tradition in creating the artwork: unfamiliarity, innovation and alienation In the opinion of beholder (either in the context of the historical tradition of the work, or in a different tradition). In connection with the lexical definitions of the exotic and strange-like elements, the emergence of “alienation and exoticism” in art and culture can be considered before modernity and the eighteenth century. When the religion divided world's people into two categories, “Christian” and “pagan” (in the 16th and 17th centuries AD): the world of Christians and the world of pagans. Christians who viewed the art and culture of pagans as “other”. Later, around 1900 AD, modern art was a major source of inspiration for revising the tradition of representation in Western art: primitive non-Western art. Gradually, art language developed into a concept, close to non-Western art that was less imitative. But, here, the West had its own narrative about primitive art and the element in which it was alien. Indigenous people, however, in the non-Western world, in the face of Western art as a strange and wonderful art, sought its useful aspects in their lives; or about the market for the sale of indigenous works and products that were decorated with Western paint and glaze or its usefulness and effectiveness it is in the way of life, thought and work through their native atmosphere. However, any element that is from a different tradition of the work or a context that, in the way of performance and creation, follows a tradition other than the reference tradition of the artist who created the work, represents the artist's relation and familiarity with the component entered into his tradition. The relationship between the artist and the strangeness is an active one, and if exploited, it leads to the interaction of the component of understanding by the artist and its exploitation as an innovative approach to the creation of the work.
Purpose: The familiarity with the strangeness in the context of the artwork seems necessary. The element of strangeness, which in the beholder's prior acquaintance with the elements in the context of tradition, and the element of strangeness, which due to lack of initial familiarity and the temporal and historical distance of the artist with the elements when this strangeness is itself, in the context of tradition, digested and manifested as a strange element in the context of the work. A question arises here: how can the process of innovation be related to the emergence of artwork and the use of exotic elements in the artwork? In the present article, we will use the method of hermeneutic analysis of Hans-Georg Gadamer in the analysis and interpretation of the artwork in order to clarify the position of the element of “strangeness” in the process of understanding. A research example is the early photographs of the Qajar period, in which many examples of the application of new and strange elements, gestures and concepts of this period can be studied and observed. In the application of the emerging media of photography among the Qajar people, the appearance of blind imitation and, at the same time, Westernized imitation can be observed in the photographic works of that period. The Qajar Shah and the court photographers imitated and existed in the form of the original photographs of the courtiers as the main element that makes the composition in the European frame in order to increase the similarities in appearance to the West and Europe nations (which they had seen and admired so much in their European travels), seemed strange in the pictorial tradition of Iran. In the research sample of the present article, the Western element of the “chair” has always been imitated and existed in most of the early photographs of the courtiers as the main element of the composition in the European frame.  The result is that in the process of confronting the beholder with the work, the artist, using his historical tradition, has placed the concept of strangeness in the context of an alien and unfamiliar element in the tradition, alongside traditional concepts causing amazement, innovation and strangeness in his work.