Exercise 3.2(c)

Another demonstration of the use of shutter speed when representing movement.

In a darkish room, I played a vinyl record (Bowie At The Beeb… disk 2, if you’re interested) and placed a small finger puppet on the centre of the LP. I then focused on this puppet with the camera set (initially) to shutter priority mode. I tried different shutter speeds.

After this I set to fully manual mode and played around a bit.

Image #1

recorddeck1_800

“Hi mum!”

View 1500 x 1000

recorddeck1exif

Even at f2.8 with ISO 3200, at 1/20th of a second this is underexposed. It was the slowest setting I could actually make the finger puppet visible. For a faster shutter speed, you’d need a flash.

 

Image #2

recorddeck2_800

“Weeeeee!”

View 1500 x 1000

recorddeck2exif

Slowing things down to 1/8th of a second. Motion blur is very evident, while things are a bit brighter. Still requires ISO 3200 which results in an unpleasantly noisy image.

 

Image #3

recorddeck3_800

“Aaaaagh!”

View 1500 x 1000

recorddeck3exif

1/4 second. Brighter, very blurred, and still needing high ISO.

 

Image #4

recorddeck4_800

“Please….. make it stop!”

View 1500 x 1000

recorddeck4exif

At 30 seconds, the tone arm is also showing motion blur.

 

Image #5

recorddeck5_800

“Oh my God, I’m gonna be sick!”

View 1500 x 1000

recorddeck5exif

At this point I switched to manual mode and stopped down to f11 and set ISO 100. I then began flicking a torch across the finger puppet, to try and capture sharp(ish) ‘ghosts’ as it went round. I failed.

 

Image #6

recorddeck6_800

“WAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!”

View 1500 x 1000

recorddeck6exif

Now I tried just flicking the torch across the finger puppet while it was in just one part of the rotation.

 

Image #7

recorddeck7_800

“Dammit… I’m calling my union. I didn’t sign up for this!”

View 1500 x 1000

recorddeck7exif

For this shot, I just swiped the light from the torch across the record once, as quickly as I could, trying to time it so that the finger puppet was facing the camera.

Exercise 3.2(b)

The Blurry Man

I find myself inspired by the work of Francesca Woodman. http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/woodman-space-providence-rhode-island-1975-1978-ar00350

The way she used long exposures to blur the movement of her body, produces images that I find fascinating.

The representation of movement is something which interests me, though unlike Woodman, and indeed, diverging from the point of this exercise somewhat, my real interest is in representing the movement of objects, or people, not through space, but through time.

Using the methods demonstrated by Woodman can achieve this objective, though whether a casual viewer would appreciate the fact that time rather than movement is the subject here, I can’t say.

All of this is working towards a larger objective, of which I have hinted previously, but still have not spoken yet. Patience please. I’m not quite there yet.

So… here’s what I did today.

With my camera set on a tripod in the garden, pointing towards the garden shed, where we have assorted furniture and garden objects effectively abandoned (we’ll hire a skip at some point, but for now, this is where they rest). It looks deliberately arranged, but it’s just how things have been dumped over time.

Despite the requirement of the exercise to use shutter priority mode, I had my camera set to full manual. I couldn’t achieve the effect I wanted otherwise.

I placed an adjustable neutral density filter on the lens, set an initial aperture of f22, ISO of 100, and a shutter speed of 30 seconds.

Next I focused on the chair, set a 2 second timer, pressed the shutter release and ran to stand behind the chair.

For the 30 seconds that the shutter was open, I… well… I jiggled… I suppose you could call it. I stood and fidgeted. Not moving a great distance in any one direction, but trying to make sure no part of my body remained still.

I used various aperture settings, with various ND filter settings and various shutter speeds…. with varying results.

What I discovered is, when it comes to adjustable ND filters, you get what you pay for. Mine was very cheap, and frankly, it’s quite rubbish. When adjusted to extreme settings, it doesn’t darken the frame evenly, rather, it darkens a cross shape across the middle of the frame, leaving the corners overexposed.

This forced me to opt for a tighter aperture setting than I really wanted… though it also caused me to try some extreme processing of the RAW files, just to see what could be done to recover lost detail. Some of the results are… interesting.

So, here we go….

Image #1

blurryman1_800

View 1500 x 1000

blurryman1exif

Concept:   

As you can see… I am there…. but I am not. I’m not going anywhere. Was I there once? Am I there now? Will I be there in the future?

Maybe all of these things… at the same time.

If, as humans tend to perceive it, time is linear, then I was there.

If however, everything that was, is, and will be, all exists… at once… that all of time exists in one big…. thing…. and we simply don’t have the ability to perceive it… then in that image… it doesn’t matter if I was, am, or will be standing there. I am simply standing there. The blur, caused by movement through space… and through time…. is what I’m using to suggest this.

 

Technical:

Now, moving away from the interpretation of the image, and back to the technical aspects, I wasn’t entirely happy with using a tight aperture. While there is a certain atmosphere created by this setting, I didn’t really want the buildings in the background to be in such sharp focus, so I tried opening up the aperture.

This is where things started to go away from what I had in mind.

 

Image #2

blurryman2_800

View 1500 x 1000

blurryman2exif

At f22, with the ND filter darkened by a couple of f-stops, what I saw on the screen was what I got when I took a photo. Unfortunately, this didn’t hold true at f2.8.

The results were massively overexposed, and while I was able to recover some detail from the RAW files in post, enough to create an interesting image, this is not what I wanted.

 

Image #3

blurryman3_800

View 1500 x 1000

blurryman3exif

Darkening the filter, I discovered the flaw in it’s function, creating a dark cross across the frame, while leaving the corners overexposed, so I stopped down to f5 instead.

The corners are still overexposed, while the buildings in the background remain sharper than I would like them.

 

Image #4

blurryman4_800

View 1500 x 1000

blurryman4exif

Playing around with the fill light, contrast and vibrancy in post created some very odd effects.

 

 

Image #5

blurryman5_800

View 1500 x 1000

blurryman5exif

I tried reducing the exposure time, and it’s getting there, but here you can see the dark cross created by the filter.

 

 

Image #6

blurryman6a_800

View 1500 x 1000

blurryman6aexif

Exposure is down to 20 seconds. Still getting a nice blur on the figure, but the dark cross is still evident, with the corners overexposed. Compensating for vignetting in post fixes this a little, but the upper left is still not acceptable.

 

Image #7

blurryman6_800

View 1500 x 1000

Extreme adjustment of levels on the previous image produced something scary. It’s not what I set out to achieve but I like this!

 

Image #8

blurryman8_800

View 1500 x 1000

blurryman8exif

Probably as near to what I’d intended as I’m going to get it with this filter. The exposure is quite short, while the aperture is quite tight. The upper left is still overexposed while the buildings aren’t as blurred as I want them. Also, unfortunately, there was a spot of fluff on the filter and it’s caught the light here, creating a faint flare like effect on the right of the image.

There is though a feeling of ‘otherness’ and the blur on the figure is very much still what I wanted.

 

Conclusion

This is heading in the direction I want to go. It says part of the thing that I want to say.

Must get a better ND filter. Hopefully a very dark non-adjustable one will do the trick…. though I’m not sure how dark they actually make them.

 

Exercise 3.2(a)

Trying out the technique demonstrated in the intro of Christopher Doyle in the opening scene of Wong Kar-Wai’s Chungking Express https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MH38QAN80vs

This is really just a first attempt, to work out how to make the method work.

I using a 24mm prime lens, I set the camera to shutter priority mode, with a shutter speed of 1/8th of a second. I set for continuous shooting mode, saving files as 1920 x 1280 jpegs.

Next I sat in my office chair, focused on the door handle, started continuous shooting, and rotated myself in the chair through 360 degrees, and only stopped shooting when I returned to my starting point.

I then loaded all of the resulting images into Sony Vegas Movie Studio Platinum. My camera has a continuous stills shooting speed of 3 images per second, so I imported 3 images into each second of the timeline in the editing suite and then rendered the series as an mp4 video file. The audio was added just to demonstrate the shooting speed of the camera as it captured individual images.

Contact Sheet

contactsheet

Obviously, this is just a proof of concept, done just to find out if I could actually do it at all. I intend to create something a bit more watchable later in the week.

Exercise 3.1

‘Using fast shutter speeds, try to isolate a frozen moment in time in a moving subject. Depending on the available light you may have to select a high ISO to avoid visible blur in the photograph. Try to find the beauty in a fragment of time that fascinated John Zarkowski. Add a selection of shots, together with relevant shooting data and a description of your shooting process (how you captured the images), to your learning log.’

The following were taken in Sheffield on a dull day, using a Canon 24mm (pancake) prime lens, with the camera set to shutter priority mode, and handheld for all shots.

Image #1

sheffieldfountains_10_800

View 1500 x 1000

sheffieldfountains_10_exif

Trying to freeze the movement in what was very poor light proved difficult. I got close to it here, but it’s not quite there. I don’t care much for the compromise settled on by shutter priority mode when choosing ISO and aperture settings. It’s neither one thing or the other in terms of depth of field, and all of the shots in the series were underexposed, requiring some tinkering with the raw files in post.

 

Image #2

sheffieldfountains_22_800

View 1500 x 1000

sheffieldfountains_22_exif

Still underexposed, and not really fast enough when looking at the fountain, but I love the part where the water is spilling of the edge of the raised circle. You can really see the form and shape of the water… like some kind of clear slow moving jelly.

 

Image #3

sheffieldfountains_56_800

View 1500 x 1000

sheffieldfountains_56_exif

I upped the shutter speed to 1/1000th of a second.  It helped, a bit.  With the poor light, the feeling in these images came out more moody than joyous, which is what I would have preferred.  Saying that, they probably fit my character better 😉

I’m constantly fascinated by this curved steel wall, with the water coming over it. I don’t actually know what word I’d use to describe the movement of the water. It doesn’t ‘pour’… it’s not a ‘torrent’… but it’s not ‘seeping’ or ‘trickling’ either.

‘Controlled and understated flow of wetness’…. or something.

 

Image #4

sheffieldfountains_60_800

View 1500 x 1000

sheffieldfountains_60_exif

It shimmers. That’s what it does.

If you ever go to Sheffield by train, you will see it, as it’s right outside the station. For a big chunk of steel, it’s a thing of beauty.

 

Image #5

sheffieldfountains_77_800

View 1500 x 1000

sheffieldfountains_77_exif

The composition is fairly ‘meh’, but I like how you can see the form of the water. The free falling part is like a sheet of rippled glass that’s frayed and torn at the edges and then shatters as it hits the steps, into a frothing falling mass.

 

Image #6

sheffieldfountains_100_800

View 1500 x 1000

sheffieldfountains_100_exif

Starting to get the hang of it now. This, and the next two images, definitely deserve looking at in the 1500 x 1000 versions. While the lower areas of the fountain are a mess of movement, the tops are well defined, and you can see their form in that frozen moment.

 

Image #7

sheffieldfountains_104_800

View 1500 x 1000

sheffieldfountains_104_exif

All that’s missing here is the champagne corks (and decent light). A celebration of gushing exuberance, caught in an instant.

 

Image #8

sheffieldfountains_109_800

View 1500 x 1000

sheffieldfountains_109_exif

Getting in close, and trying not to get the camera wet (it’s not waterproof). When looking at the large version of this image, you can really see the form of the water, and get an impression of the energy in the scene. It was quite exhilarating. I chose not to correct the slightly off kilter nature of the shot, as it adds a kind of giddy sensation that goes well with the subject matter.

 

I’ve concluded that it pays to use a lens that’s capable of wide apertures when shooting like this in poor light. Trying to use my 18-55 kit lens on this shoot would have been hopeless.  The Canon 24mm pancake I was using here was completely new to me (bought specifically for this exercise), and I took quite a few shots with it after I’d completed taking shots for this series. I have to say, it’s produces very pleasing results, and between it and my ‘nifty fifty’, my kit lense probably isn’t going to see much more use.

 

Art Photography Now by Susan Bright

I have mentioned in previous posts my dislike for, to put it politely,  convoluted ‘art speak’.

I recognise the need to go into detail when explaining a complex concept, of which there can be many, when dealing with art. What I dislike, however, is the tendency for some artists, critics, or commentators to use excessively verbose language when describing something that is, in reality,  quite simple. Using six pages to describe something that could be explained in half a page, not only doesn’t impress me, it annoys me to the point that I will put the book down and not pick it up again.

To deliberately make it more difficult to read a book, which is supposed to be sharing ideas and information, to the point that it excludes a large part of the potential readership, is, to my mind, counterproductive. Or to speak my mind more openly, it’s pretentious elitist rubbish, and I reject it utterly.

I must confess to some concern regarding my prospects for passing this degree course. I don’t know to what extent I will be required to partake of or participate in such nonsense, but I fear a refusal to do so may result in a fail. We shall see.

Now, with all of that in mind, I come to the topic at hand… Art Photography Now by Susan Bright, and I must say immediately, it is a breath of fresh air.

Susan’s own words, while far from being dumbed down in any way, manage to convey complex and detailed ideas in a way that is pleasingly intelligible.

‘The grandeur of landscape painting reverberates through this series by Finnish artist Brotheurs, whose title plays on the relationship between photography and painting and on the changed status that photography now enjoys in the art world.’ (Bright, 2005:51)

As person of merely reasonable intelligence, I can read that, and appreciate both the meaning, and eloquence.

To be fair, some of the featured artists do occasionally plunge into explanations of their work that cause me to pause for a moment, but then no-one said art was supposed to be easy.

Counter to this though are the artists who eschew the pretentious or elitist concept altogether, just do what they feel like, and then let others make up whatever explanation they like about it.

‘…I don’t theorize when I work. I would read theoretical stuff about my work and think ,”What? Where did they get that?” The work was so intuitive for me, I didn’t know where it was coming from. So I thought I had better not say anything or I’d blow it.’ (Sherman 2005, cited in Bright 2005:25)

I can’t even begin to tell you how much I appreciate such an open and honest explanation.

 

In addition to the quality and intelligibility of the writing, the included images are of both a size and quality that allows the viewer to appreciate them in some detail, rather than just get a vague impression. Obviously, this will never come close to seeing the works in a gallery, but in this form, it is possible to decide whose work is of interest and worthy of further investigation.

In conclusion, I have found this book to be a very good starting point. It covers several artists/photographers working in each of the various different fields of photography, gives an explanation of their ideas and concepts, and shows us examples of their work.

This is not a ‘be all and end all’ of art photography… it’s an index… a stepping off point. Start here… see what interests you, and investigate at your leisure.

 

Reference

Bright, S. (2005) Art Photography Now. London: Thames and Hudson

 

 

 

Reflection Following Tutor Feedback on Assignment 2

I’m feeling kind of raw about this, so it may not be the best time to post, but on the other hand, ‘strike while the iron is hot’. I Shall focus on certain aspects of feedback first, and then broaden my view and see how I feel.

Specific Points

“I am sorry that you were confused about certain elements of the brief Steve. Annoyingly, there are no hard and fast rules about what you should photograph and what you intend to include within a series. Really this section of the unit is to get you to think about how you can present a coherent series of pictures that considers slightly different aspects of an overarching idea or set of themes.”  White (2017)

The problem I had was not with the subject matter, it was with what was supposed to be demonstrated. The way the assignment was worded, it initially looked like a demonstration of the various different skills from the previous exercises was required. Things then changed tack, and it became apparent (though I didn’t recognise this until far too late) that one particular format was to be adhered to. The key phrase, in reference to focal length/aperture setting, (and which I initially missed) was “you should keep the same combination throughout.” ‘Should’… not ‘could’.

“It is great that you have chosen a subject that you are clearly interested (mildly obsessed?) with. It is better to deal with the things we are interested in than attempt to bolt an interest on to something that we perhaps feel we should deal with. However, it does feel that you fell back to something that was easier to work with.” White (2017)

I have Asperger’s Syndrome, so obsession is a way of life.

I didn’t really fall back on something easier to work with. As I said in my submission, while the subject matter was something I’m more familiar with, the manner of photographing it was far from my comfort zone. The original plan was, for me, far easier.

The final choice of subject matter was dictated by the fact that I only had two days before the deadline when I realised I had made an error in interpreting the brief.

“However, what is it that each image adds to the reading? How can you use the skills at your disposal to ask questions about this particular collection of objects? Could you begin to ask about the need for humans to collect things? Or about how collectors are often seen as outsiders or obsessives or nerds etc.?” White (2017)

There was nothing in the brief and there has been nothing in the coursework covering any aspect of meaning or interpretation in this manner. I realise that such things are an important aspect of art/photography, and I expect such things to come up later, but if something is not mentioned in the brief, or at any point in the material so far….

This feels like moving the goalposts.

I can create conceptual art until the cows come home, but when I have a brief to work to, I try to provide what has been asked for.

Society has moved on. ‘Nerds’ (I prefer to call myself a geek) and ‘Geek Culture’ are now considered cool and part of the mainstream. “However, geek culture is becoming increasingly mainstream…” http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0142200 McCain (2015)

“What if you were to arrange some of the objects to begin to look like some kind of utopian city? Or by photographing in selective ways suggest that these things are in fact state of the art and not obsolete? What is it about these images that so clearly tells us that they are out of date, colour, material, shape?” White (2017)

It is not part of my methodology (my own voice?) to move or arrange things to create an image. I try to show things as they are, and view or interpret them through the use of the camera, not the manipulation of the objects themselves. To do otherwise would, to my mind, be contrived. These images fall far more into ‘documentary’ than ‘still life’.

Why would I want to suggest that they are state of the art objects? They are not. If the brief were to ‘represent something as opposite of what it is’, that would be fine, but it is not. I find the very idea, somehow, wrong.

There is nothing specific about these images that says the objects are out of date. That was not my intention. As I said in my submission notes “It may be that the viewer is unaware of the details of the object entirely, and quite unlikely that they will be aware of any ‘retro futurist’ aspect or context. The viewer is forced to look at specific fine details, or vague forms or shapes, and to interpret what they see in whatever manner suits them.”

If I am trying to send any kind of message with this series, it is “what a thing is and how you view it, may not be, and do not have to be, related”

“Although I understand that you were worried about adhering to the brief but after looking at your Church images, I wonder if it would have not been a better idea to continue to wrestle with this subject than to fall back on something that is practically easier to photograph?” White (2017)

As I stated in my submission notes, there was not enough material to create a coherent set, and coherence appeared to be the main objective of the brief. There was neither the time, nor suitable weather to take more shots.

What I fell back on was not practically easier to photograph. That the objects were in my own home did not make the task easier. Shooting with a tripod in a very confined space, while it’s warmer, is a lot more stressful for a person who suffers sensory overload, than shooting in a graveyard.

“Think about how you could have utilized the different technical approaches to photographic image making in order to suggest very different readings of the same actual building.

If you think about the definition of a series that I gave in the initial part of this feedback, in the church example, there would have been a coherence set by the use of the same building but each image would add another way of seeing the same space.” White (2017)

This is something I considered doing before going for a different subject. The problem here is, while the brief is written in a very confusing manner, its meaning, when finally appreciated, is specific, and it requires one specific technique to be adhered to.

So, my choices were, adhere to the brief and change subject matter due to time/weather and produce something less interesting… or stick with the original set and produce something that does not conform to the specifics of the brief.

It seems that neither one is a satisfactory solution, but I had to ask myself, when submitting for formal assessment, would the assessors mark me down for not adhering to the brief? Or more specifically… why would they not?

“The series as a whole would be more successful if the nature of these objects were to subtly unfold as the series progresses.” White (2017)

This is interesting. I placed the images in their current order based  on their place in computing/gaming history. Taking a less literal approach makes sense given that my intention was to detach the aesthetic of the object from what it actually is.

A Wider View

So, taking a wider view, partly of my own reaction to this feedback, and partly of how I shall address it.

As is probably clear from the tone of my responses, I’m feeling a combination of frustration and irritation.

I’m very frustrated by the vague nature of the assignments, and on occasion, the coursework itself. I understand that interpretation is a big part of creative work, but I also know that when working at degree level, if there are specific requirements, they should be addressed. I feel there are conflicting messages here, and that troubles me.

I feel irritated by some of the feedback. Some of this will surely be down to my own grumpy and irritable nature. From my perspective, I feel like my tutor has made remarks on aspects of my submission that ignore statements that I made.

I feel irritated that his advice contradicts the requirements of the brief. Would an assessor take such an open view, at formal assessment?

Having said that, I have to ponder… what if I had never even mentioned my aborted project in the church yard?

What if I had presented this assignment in its current form, and concentrated on explaining what it was about?

What if I had not been open about my hobby, where these items are, and what my interest in them is?

I am thinking sometimes less is more. Rather than telling the story of how I came to produce the series that I did, I should have presented it in isolation. Use the limited word count to explore the set I created in more detail.

I definitely need to explore my own interpretations of my work in my submissions, lest interpretations that are a million miles from my intention are attributed to them.

On the topic of ‘finding your own voice’… I recognise that it is a tutor’s job to encourage students to find theirs. Thing is… I already known what mine is. I just haven’t expressed it or explored it openly. It is in much (though not all, due to requirements of exercises and assignments) of my work. It just isn’t obvious. I need to address this.

Conclusion

I shall do two things, and then make a decision.

  1. I shall, when the weather permits, go back to the church yard and take more shots, conforming to a specific style/format.
  2. I shall re-write the notes for the computer/gaming set I submitted, exploring the work I actually submitted, and remove any mention of the aborted set.

Whichever of these turns out best will be the assignment that I submit for assessment.

A final note to myself: Be sure I have fully understood the brief in future assignments before I start shooting. Get a second opinion.

Reference

McCain, J (2015) A Psychological Exploration of Engagement in Geek Culture AT http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0142200 (Accessed 12/1/2017)

White, M (2017) Formative Feedback [Email attachment sent to Steve Challis 11th January 2017]

Assignment 2: Tutor Feedback

Overall Comments

 I am sorry that you were confused about certain elements of the brief Steve. Annoyingly, there are no hard and fast rules about what you should photograph and what you intend to include within a series. Really this section of the unit is to get you to think about how you can present a coherent series of pictures that considers slightly different aspects of an overarching idea or set of themes. Each image should add something to the experience of looking whilst all of the photographs hang together as a workable collection. The way that different series’ actually hang together depends on the conceptual and compositional elements within each specific project.

Have a look at some examples of series that adhere to this formula and some that don’t (see below).

 Assessment potential

 I understand your aim is to go for the Photography/Creative Arts* Degree and that you plan to submit your work for assessment at the end of this course. From the work you have shown in this assignment, providing you commit yourself to the course, I believe you have the potential to pass at assessment.  In order to meet all the assessment criteria, there are certain areas you will need to focus on, which I will outline in my feedback.   

 

Demonstration of technical and Visual Skills, Quality of Outcome, Demonstration of Creativity

It is great that you have chosen a subject that you are clearly interested (mildly obsessed?) with. It is better to deal with the things we are interested in than attempt to bolt an interest on to something that we perhaps feel we should deal with. However, it does feel that you fell back to something that was easier to work with.

In technical terms, you have a good grasp of the use of shallow depth of field and you have thought about the composition of each image and about how these pictures work together as a series. Indeed, the fact that there is a uniform hue and that they are all in the landscape orientation makes sure that they sit together.  However, what is it that each image adds to the reading? How can you use the skills at your disposal to ask questions about this particular collection of objects? Could you begin to ask about the need for humans to collect things? Or about how collectors are often seen as outsiders or obsessives or nerds etc.? Or about how institutions rely on collections of things to tell stories about the past? What function does the design museum have? Could you photograph objects there?

All of these things are really interesting cultural possibilities that could be utilized through a photographic series. You talk about the fact that these objects were, at one time, state of the art and that technological gadgets and tools very quickly become obsolete both in terms of purpose and design. Again this is a great starting point. What if you were to arrange some of the objects to begin to look like some kind of utopian city? Or by photographing in selective ways suggest that these things are in fact state of the art and not obsolete? What is it about these images that so clearly tells us that they are out of date, colour, material, shape?

Although I understand that you were worried about adhering to the brief but after looking at your Church images, I wonder if it would have not been a better idea to continue to wrestle with this subject than to fall back on something that is practically easier to photograph?

Churches form an important part of our everyday as well as creative culture. They figure as places of celebration, of mourning, of horror, of splendor, of magic etc. etc. etc. Think about how you could have utilized the different technical approaches to photographic image making in order to suggest very different readings of the same actual building.

If you think about the definition of a series that I gave in the initial part of this feedback, in the church example, there would have been a coherence set by the use of the same building but each image would add another way of seeing the same space.

In terms of individual images, for me, number 4 is by far the most successful. The shallow depth of field is used to selectively obscure elements of the picture frame that otherwise might give too much away. This image works because it is beginning to ask some of the potential questions that I raise earlier in the feedback. There is an intrigue about this image because although the colour and material suggest older computer technology, the way that it is photographed leaves much more work for the viewer to do and means that the specific age of this or these objects is not clear.

The antithesis of this reading is perhaps suggested by image 3 where the nature, design, age of the computer is far too obvious. We know exactly what it is and roughly how old it is without having to think too carefully.

The series as a whole would be more successful if the nature of these objects were to subtly unfold as the series progresses.

 

Coursework

Demonstration of technical and Visual Skills, Demonstration of Creativity

Your coursework continues to be very thorough, keep it up.

 

Research

Context, reflective thinking, critical thinking, analysis

Try to broaden your research by looking at more photographers, artists and writers. Visit exhibitions where you can and reflect on what you see.

 

Learning Log

Context, reflective thinking, critical thinking, analysis

Your learning log is easy to read and gives a good sense of your development.

 

Suggested reading/viewing

Context

Sian Bonnell – look at the way that Bonnell photogrpahs easily recognizable objects but yet makes us think about them very differently. Her Constructed Coast project is a good starting point.

Cindy Sherman – Look at Sherman’s Untitled Film Stills project and think about how coherent the series is and how each image adds more to the series.

Thomas Ruff – portraits – the coherence here is obvious but each human subject is, or course, very different.

Hendrik Kerstens – again a very coherent strategy to image making.

Wolfgnag Tillmans – perhaps Tillmans presents the antidote to a series? I would be interested to read your thoughts in a blog post?

 

Pointers for the next assignment / assessment

 

  • More research in a wider range of contemporary image makers.
  • Try to work through ideas rather than jump to a new ‘idea’

 

Tutor name Matt White
Date 11/01/2017
Next assignment due 8th March 2017