A New Direction

I've followed on the de-focused work and begun to experiment with it. Some are more successful than others but this is the new direction I want to follow. There was something about the work I’d been producing that was feeling less and less like my work. It wasn’t feeling like my ‘style’ was apparent in it, it was getting further and further away from something I’d be proud to claim as mine.

Defocusing an image allows it to start using the language of memory, and of dreams. It creates an impression of a scene, and possibly some recognisable features (a streetlight, a bridge) but the direct context of the place/subject is stripped away. A timeless/placeless feeling becomes to be apparent – the images become unspecific, undirective. They become impressionistic, and shapes, colours and tone become ever more important. Although they still may allude to things, the narrative of the image becomes far more open and doesn’t necessarily go further than a suggestion, a hint towards something.

This is possibly my favorite so far. There could be a slight contradiction between the image and the intent. I want to explore the sense of time and narrative within an image through defamiliarisation. However, this is shot at the market, and although it’s not quite the market most people know, it’s recognisable. I felt it was worth working with despite this, mainly because of the colours and the structures. There’s a carnivalesque feel to the image, but this is combined with a certain sense of threat as this is a place that’s known for its hustle and bustle, but it’s night and the place is deserted except for the single figure. This figure enables the viewer to begin constructing narratives, but its ambiguity leaves the narrative open. The lack of focus and distorted perspective help to present the place in an unfamiliar way, and, interestingly, the part of the image that appears to have the most distorted perspective (the left side of the centre stall) is actually contained in one photograph.

I feel this image is working to a certain degree as well. It feels placeless to me; it could be in a different city, a different country. There is a figure in this image but between the focus and the way the light fell, she’s lost the dark patch on the right. But if on a close inspection someone wonders if that could be a person, could that be enough in itself? Even though the image isn’t supposed to be focused, it doesn’t feel quite right. I’m not sure at this stage if it needs to be slightly sharper, or perhaps even less – this is something I’m going to have to learn through practice.









This image felt like it should work, and may have had potential but on reflection it’s got a long way to go. It’s too busy to work as a defocused image. I tried separating the images and leaving gaps to see if that would improve it. I think the idea of having disconnected, defocused images could work, but it’s really not there yet. This has drawn my attention to the end right image – it’s working quite well on its own, and I think this could be down to its composition. The suggestion of figures in the left two images is quite an interesting feature, and something to bear in mind.










The rest of these images aren’t really working, but there's things I can take from them. It's looking like figures will have to be well lit, I think the images are going to need plenty of space in them and the tonal qualities and colours within a scene are more important than ever;

These are a couple of single images I felt were working on some level;

These images are obviously a bit out of keeping with this new direction, but the images have a vibrant quality to them with it's really nice, and the short depth of field is good practice for the other things I'm doing. Also, in it tutorial it was pointed out to me that these are actually quite reminiscent of the images above, especially the circular shapes of the lego, and the circular shapes of the lights.

Something that came up in tutorial was how I might present my work in the degree show. Displaying the image/images using a projector or a lightbox might work pretty well - it would illuminate the use of light within the images, and possibly give more impact to the unfocused nature of the work. This is obviously something that'll need playing with to see if it's going to work or not.

I'm edging more towards playing with light sources than a projector - if an image is projected, it never wholly exists within the physical world. Although this might be an interesting idea, I definitely want to have a little play with lights.

Research

With a switch towards more representational, unfocused images, Uta Barth is an obvious artist to look at.
Her work challenges the borders of photography, and evokes the language of memory. Her images appear alien, yet strangely familiar. We can recognise shapes and features within them, but as these are not clearly defined, it's up to use to reconstruct the work and interpret it in our own individual way.
Her work becomes about the act of looking and the way in which we see, as much as what's contained within the images themselves. They evoke a more base, emotional response than an intellectual one, we react to the image, rather than try to understand it.
These principles are what I want to incorporate into my work - this suggestivity and subjectivity. I want to create impressions of scenes, and allude to narratives and ideas rather than dictate them.

I discovered Slinkachu's work over Christmas. It revolves around "little hand painted people left in London to fend for themselves." I think it's fantastic, but it's not the main part of his work that I'm interested in with relation to my work, but the backgrounds. When photographing these people at very close range, the background is out of focus, but beautiful. Obviously this is not the key part to the image, but I really like the effect, and think it's another good example of the kind of direction I might be headed.

I've recently discovered Idris Khan's work. He works with amalgamated images to create something new. The image on the left is constructed from Bernd and Hilla Becher's series of gas cylinders. Despite being constructed from photographs, his work almost appears more painterly in its appearance. This stretching of the boundaries of the photographic medium is something I'm becoming increasingly interested in, and this is an exciting approach to creating work.

I really like Astrid Kruse Jensen's work. They appear almost like dreams - a small moment that raises more questions than it can provide answers to. Her work "explores the passage between reality and imagination, and the constant clash between nature and the artificial." The images are suggestive, and although features are recognisable, they don't appear to be anchored within the 'real' world.

In the Country

Christmas holidays and an opportunity to play. Any work I did back at home over Christmas was going to be a bit of a new take on things, going from working in the city at night to the Suffolk countryside during the day (we don’t have many streetlights.) Also, I had easy access to DSLR, so had a great opportunity to make the quality switch to RAW files.
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;

Figures and Narratives

These images are an attempt at introducing figures to the scenes in order to create a narrative. I decided to reuse places I’ve already been to, so I could focus more on the person than the location.

Generally, the images aren't working; the figure is too self-conscious and self-aware. She is aware of her nature of a subject, and dominates a number of the images. These things go against the ideas behind the work, and the direction I should have been headed. I realised the potential of tiny, subtle figures in previous images, I seem to have reverted back to experiment-mode and just played with incorporating a figure, and finding ways to intentionally include a subtle actually proved harder to replicate since I was aware of what I was attempting. However, it’s not all bad, there are small parts in the images that hint to what does work successfully.
On top of this, I’m starting to find that everything I try that’s not working feels like it’s bringing me closer to something that does.

The ones in this location are working best; they have stuck much closer to the idea of more subtle figures. I also captured a man walking towards my figure (above) and this idea, considered at an earlier stage, does appear to work. I’ve retried multiple figures but this detracts from the repetition of structural elements within the images. I also feel it ruins the way in which I would want the audience to construct a narrative – if I’m going to follow the more narrative based route than the formal constructional one, I would want to create an open, suggestive narrative, rather than directional. I feel the use of a repeated figure could be too directional to the audience and be seen to be implying a meaning, rather than leaving the space for the audience to create their own.

The other thing these images raised for me was the use of shadow; in some images the shadow is clearly cut off, while in others there is a shadow without a figure to cast it. This could be an interesting thing to play with, but I’m not convinced it fits with the way I’d like to take my work forward.

The issue at this point is I’m finding myself less sure of how I do want to take my work forward. I have not yet tried bringing in surreal qualities to the images. I think it could work very successfully but it doesn't feel like my work. It's obviously important to challenge yourself and the way in which you work, but I also feel it's important to stay true to your own style, and big men in bunny suits just isn't the kind of thing I do.
Although I was excited about this direction initially, I’m beginning to feel as if it may have peaked too early, or perhaps I’m just taking it in the wrong direction.


To combat this, I’ve got a list of things I can try;

play more with subtle figures

new locations

try daylight

try landscape

try the surreal

try different people and combinations of people

use a high quality camera and keep the images in better quality

Research

As previously mentioned, I'm beginning to struggle a bit with where to take my work. There appear to be two clear paths; either the work is becoming about the formal, compositional qualities of the image, or about the more aesthetic and evocative aspects of the image.

Candida Hofer's work reflects the structural compositional direction that is partially present in my work. She seems to work on the premise of documenting, and the locations of her images tend to be public spaces. Her images are stunningly composed and can be seen to work partly on the premise of impressing the viewer, I don't feel it's the direction in which I want to take my work.

Bernd and Hilla Becher's work is on a similar basis. It's also based around the structural qualities of the objects they photograph, and there's a definite focus on objectivity. These are gas cylinders, they should be boring, but by photographing and documenting them, it becomes about their appearance and their construction, the way the pillars are formed and how they interact with the natural landscape around them (when one is clearly present.)
However, while looking at work such as this, and Candida Hofer, I've begun to think I'd prefer to take my work in a much more subjective direction, than their objective, documentary one.
Also, while researching these artists, I found it incredibly interesting to note that both Andreas Gursky and Candida Hofer studied under Bernd and Hilla Becher. The similarities between the artists are obvious, but they've all worked with similar styles or principles in very different ways.

Gregory Crewdson's work is centred around narrative. The main way his narrative is created is by the presence of people. His images could be seen as photography's equivalent of big budget movies. They're highly staged and highly suggestive - they appear as a frozen instant from the middle of the event. It's the job of the viewer to create a narrative that covers the before and after.
In relation to my work, I like the premise, but the execution is obviously a long way from my style.

Duane Michals' work is also narrative based. Through a series of images taken at different stages of an interaction or occurrence, Michals suggests a narrative. The basic premise of these can be seen as relatively directive (as on the left, two men pass and appear to recognise each other in the street) but the work is left open enough for the viewer to create their own narrative around the images.

Physicality

My work so far has been digital – digital camera, showing work on a computer, support work in a blog – I’ve printed some of the images to see how they work in the physical world. (I've submitted these so you can have a look and see what I mean. I've left out the black and white image because it was just a quick experiment and there is a colour version of the same thing.) The plan is to eventually display the work in a gallery context, so it was worth having a look at how it translates on paper.


I also wanted to see what happens if the images are printed separately and joined physically, instead of joined digitally and printed as one.


As these images are of a large size, it’s also helpful to get an idea of how the proportions of the images translate. A number of them are very wide, but not very high, and I’ve been concerned that this will not work in print, because to get the height to reasonable size, they will end up too wide to remain effective. My eventual aim is to stick with a large scale, due to the nature of the work, but just to get an idea I’ve kept this set of print outs relatively small, just to get a feel for the physically of the work. I think even at this scale, I'm not sure I like the proportions of the longer images. It may be better to keep the photographs in portrait to add a bit more height, and possibly keep the number of photographs in the sequence a bit lower.


The process of printing and sticking generated a number of new considerations.


An issue that I have known was coming since the outset is the image quality from the camera I've been using (a Lumix compact camera.) This has been ideal for me to use - its light-weight, accessible nature has allowed me to work easily and more prolifically than a DSLR. I prefer working in this way initially, because I’m comfortable with the camera and this has meant I can just focus on what I was capturing and the possibilities of the images, rather than more technical considerations. However, as the camera saves the images as JPEGs, the quality won't be sufficient for my end needs and I’ll need to start using a DSLR, and RAW files to give me more control over the images and a much higher quality.

I also discovered that I do not like the effect of printing out the images individually and then joining them. I find the outcomes too scrappy, and it draws more attention to the individuality of each image in the set, whereas I prefer the effect of blurring the boundaries between the images. The digital joining has an effect much more suited to my needs.

The image with the hands is mounted in two parts due to space issues. I was testing printing a4 then blowing the images up to a3 so I split the initial image in two digitally and mounted them separately to gauge what the effect of this would be. I actually quite like the outcome - I like the juxtaposition of having a number of images digitally and smoothly joined, then re-split in two. I'm not sure yet, but the gap between the two could either emphasise the ideas of time and possibly narrative, or it might turn out to be an obvious throw towards it. More experimenting may sort this out. However, with this brief delve into layout and presentation and printing considerations, I feel I need to get back to the images themselves and where I want to go with them. I don’t feel these are strong enough.
An interesting effect present on some of the print outs, is that there's a quality to them that almost appears illustrated on close inspection. I think this is because of the quality of both the JPEGs and the way I printed, but it's actually quite a nice effect. This style is something I may come back to - it questions the nature of a photograph, and the conventions generally associated with taking a good one.

I still haven't explored either the surreal possibilities of these scenes, or the deliberate inclusion of figures to create a narrative. These will be my next aims.