One of the things that seems to always draw my attention to an image is strong gestalt and this is what I liked about the last set of images (Project 6 Urine). Simple images with strong graphics have an appeal that is very different to complex imagery. Take the two photos below. While the latter invites inspection the former often arrests first and then invites inspection and consideration.
Obviously both images speak, but the clarity of voice in the former is somehow much more satisfying to me than the latter. I wonder if this is due to the former’s simple image of the chairs being created by me to meet an emotional need whereas the latter was taken as a memento and conditions dictated a collage to get most people in the shot?
The edges of the approaches I have used so far have been to keep things real and not allow my representation of them to transform them into something wholly different to the referent. (The chairs are still recognisable as chairs and the people as people). But maybe I should try this?
Here is a set of random stuff that relates to the management of my impairment selected, shot and then simplified using Adobe Elements automated gallery feature. What do they say to you?
These images seem to me very different from Project 5: Evidence even though they are representations of kit shown detached from their contexts. The redaction of detail in terms of colour and tone result in very two dimensional pictures where shape and colour dominate. The colours are hard and angry and so the set is much less contemplative than Project 5 Evidence and much more akin to shouting. In that sense this set is expressionist and abstract rather than indexical and documentary. By this I mean it’s not an authentic index of the subject matter but uses the subject matter to present an authentic representation of how I feel.