When having a play around with some of the new images, I came up with these. They’re created by layering two (or more) images and changing the opacity to create a similar effect as a double exposure.
As I was both documenting the site with as well as bearing in mind my recent work with defocused images, I created these by combining both a focused image and a defocused one.
In this case, the only images from the angle were very different scales, but this effect is actually quite successful. The building almost appears to be either expanding, or imploding.
My work so far has been about creating constructions, representations and abstractions of places. This began in a more literal sense – by building images from constituent parts. Then, by defocusing the images, this became more about abstraction without my reconstruction – the image was left for the viewer to reconstruct in their own mind. With this new layering technique, the boundaries between these two approaches become somewhat breached. The image contains both a ‘true’ photograph of the place, as well a defocused, representational image, and then also shifts of perspective and a reconstruction – a representation of the place which is neither strictly ‘real’ nor wholly abstracted.
The image also begins to take on the language of memory. We don’t necessarily remember a place as it would be recognised in a straight photograph, we remember an impression of a place. These images are also an impression – they explore more than simply the literal scene.
There is also a ghostlike presence to the images, as is the case with double exposures. This presence works well with the nature of the images themselves. These are images of an abandoned building in the middle of the countryside that has been left to become derelict. There is then naturally an eerie sense of presence through absence within the images. When we see a building of this kind, we know that there used to be people there. It used to be a fully functioning building, (I believe this is part of an old airfield,) and we then attempt to provide it with a purpose – what was it? What did it used to look like? Who used to work there? What was it like?
By presenting the images in this way, it also takes on some of the qualities of a long exposure, almost like an hour-long exposure. This passing of time within the image reflects the passing of time of the building and again points to its history, the ghost image almost appearing like the building in a past time.
I’m feeling very enthusiastic about this work, so the way forward is to print one of the images and see how that is working. This then raises the question of scale. I have tried projecting the images and they’re working well at a fairly large scale. It provides them an importance which is part of the point of documenting such buildings.
They also have potential to work at a smaller scale, more snapshot size, which could then afford them a certain defiance, and also become a throw back to older, film based photography. Also these buildings require time, patience and attention to discover so perhaps the scale of the images should reflect this. However, the detail between the overlapping layers and the overall impact of the images could be easily lost at a small scale.
I think the way forward from here is to print out one of the images. As previously mentioned, I have been considering working with light boxes, and I have a feeling that the nature of these images will work well presented on a light box. For this reason, I am going to print on backlit film and use a light box I have access to. I am going to print at A2 size, as I think the argument for going larger is stronger than the argument for going small, and I think it would give a better guide as to how the images are working in this format. I am not going any larger at this stage partly due to monetary constraints, and I think I need to get more of an idea of the physicality of the work than necessarily feeling the urge to make everything massive.
I also had a look at what would happen using the same technique on some of the stronger seaside images, but these aren't working so well. I think they still have a certain amount of appeal, but this is solely on an aesthetic level. This highlights the idea that the above images are working not only aesthetically, but also through their reading and their subject matter.
