Rather than isolate items within the frame or imbue the image was false values of movement (as some of my earlier work has done this week) I placed some kit into a plastic container and shot through it. I then experimented with different processing approaches – high key, high contrast, warm etc and liked some of the effects.
I think these images, particularly the softer abstract ones invite the viewer to consider what they are looking at and I could see such an image produced to a really large scale so that these small things overwhelm the viewer and this would produce a rather dominant effect that could work to offer them something of how feel the burden of having to use this kit day in and day out. However while a single individual image works well I can’t really see the approach having any sustainability. If I used such an image it will need to be within the context of a wider deeper discourse otherwise it is a bit random.
I then went on to apply a similar approach to some kit – see below – but the same criticism applies in that a single image might work by offering the viewer an insight into my world but a series just either repeats, and may even muddy the evocation when subject to radically different processing.
These are poor approaches and don’t work at all. I don’t think it’s because I am unclear about what I want the images to say (compression, isolation, anomie, burden, all documented) but how I can say it in a way that is visually engaging. The photos by themselves offer different levels of visual interest but would need to be shown in association with other imagery to activate their relevance. Shown like this in isolation they just don’t work.