I tried some panorama-style shots of buildings to test whether this is where I should take things back to. I’ve realised it’s not. Although the building shots were possibly the key turning point so far, I feel I’ve taken it as far as I want to. Although there are some nice parts to some of these images, continuing working in this way just isn’t exciting anymore.
This could be likened to Roland Barthes’ ideas of studium and punctum. These images do have a studium – they hold a surface interest, there are some nice qualities about them – but there’s no punctum. They’re static images, there’s nothing there that grabs me and holds my interest. When I stop looking at the image, it doesn’t stay with me.
I think this image could be a turning point:
It was born out of play, but there’s something about it that’s got me excited about the work again. I know it has its flaws, mainly that the clear joins between the separate photos contradict the dream-like, unfocused qualities of the image. Also, the washed out blue of the sky in the far left image would’ve been lovely if it had continued all the way through, but the sun was sitting low in the sky and causing me a few issues.
Because the image is not clearly focused, the viewer has to deconstruct the visual clues within the image and reconstruct it within their mind to create their own interpretation and impression of it. The lack of sharp detail give the image a timeless/placeless quality, which means each viewer can reach an individual reading of it.
I think this style is something I definitely need to follow up and experiment further. I haven’t really worked with intentionally defocused images before, but I feel this path could have real potential.
Here's some single images that, although not directly relevant, every little counts;
