Have put off dealing with this for almost two weeks now, despite feeling happy with the eventual project space collaboration and exhibition. The reason for this lies within that feeling of satisfaction at having put together a successful collaborative show and not wanting to ruin that by dragging myself through a prolonged and deep reflection on it preferring to accept it for what I feel it was.
Anyway on with this response, will try to keep it brief....
During the crit Neil decided to trial a new method of critiquing the work, that being everybody gets a chance to ask a question/ raise an issue or simply comment upon the the work. This worked well and im presuming was instigated to prevent domination of the crit by either one or two people which is frequently the danger. The everyone gets a chance format allowed me to take notes for each person and their individual comments which in turn allowed me to see what issues cropped up repeatedly this meaning that these were the issues/ things most important to the viewers and these are what I will address.
1. Nostalgia/ memory/ aged- This was the most commented on, people were immediately drawn to the worn and slightly degraded appearances of the works. This was nice to hear as from the start Iain and I had strongly discussed this as a main theme of the work, that of being centred around history/ memory and the dislocation or degradation of these, so to hear that this aspect came across in the work was really heartening.
2. The material - alot of comments were directed towards the nature of the materials used especially that of the absorbent nature (with regards to light) of the plaster blocks. Again this was good to hear, the importance of natural light in the work and the changing aspect of this meant that the materials used had to blend with the ambient light, moving with it and working with it so as to enforce the transitional nature of Iain's image giving a life to the still image that had maybe been slightly lost in its transition to print as well as linking to the changing light in the video installation.
3. The video installation- The video installation was unfortunately not placed within the same room as the rest of the works due to installation problems and with the required natural light being too powerful to allow the projector to project the image across the space as we had intended. This meant the durational aspect of the work was sadly not as obvious. The method of display (with the projected film) also drew alot of discussion though having been to see the "Beholder" exhibition at talbot rice gallery (where there were projectors everywhere) im not sure it was fair comment to include a projector as something to be criticised upon as it was clearly a means to an end.
Anyway all things considered it was in Iain and my opinions a good show a good collaboration and was well received which is the main thing.
I know i said i would try to keep it brief but that proved to be impossible. Have been going at this for a while and shortened it all i could. If you read it all I'll buy you a beer. :)
i'm glad you had a successful show, being there would have been nice, but hey-ho.
ReplyDeleteHaving had projector-based issues myself, I feel for you. the contradiction between works which require (seemingly) a huge participation from natural light, and, from the sounds of it, benefit greatly from its transitions throughout the day and it's ability to manipulate and transform the object/prints/both over the course of the day, and the projections which rallies against any kind of light, and renders itself useless unless in a space gollum would find ambient, was always going to pose a threat to the over-all effect of the exhibit. Putting it in a separate space seems to have been the only logical solution.
This having be said, the fact that the projection stood alone in another room, attention would always be drawn to the projection equipment itself as an eye-sore. I've always found this the single most infuriating aspect of projection. Like a print or painting hung on an imperfect wall, the wall shouldn't matter if the work is strong enough, no one will be looking at dodgey plastering if you have a stunner of a print, but there will always be people that want to pick holes, and there will always be problems which are unsolvable, so you're right not to dwell on that as a negative.
Some spaces allow for sneaky concealing of projecting equipment, but unless you have a lot of time/and or budget, most don't.
The only real successes I've seen with undisguised projectors are those which use the big traditional film-role ones. That's mostly because they're a thing of beauty in themselves (yeah, I'm unleashing my inner nerd...)and the often grainy or imperfect projections add to the footage itself. This may work for your pieces (? - I've not seen the films)but if you're looking for uncompromising quality, you're still going to be lumbered with one of those modern ugly boxes.
Rant about projections over, but you get where I'm coming from. Sorry if it's not totally coherent, but my head's full of dissertation drivel.
With all this in mind - pint claimed! ;) make that two, as I think my comment is longer than your post!
gah just wrote a long reply then tried to preview it and it deleted itself. From what i remeber i said something like i understand the need to discuss and think about why things a arranged and used in certain ways during an exhibition i just dont see that when it comes down to something like a projector or other techy piece of kit which is obviously there to fulfill a specific purpose why we need to discuss it, maybe that is my failing in that i cant get past seeing them as a tool and not as objects in themselves, if it was a room of them i could maybe form an opinion on why they were placed the way they are etc. As i mentioned i had been at an exhibton at talbot rice and there was a room full of projectors projecting different video works (the exhibition was really quite good and would recomend checking it out if in edinburgh) and not for one moment did i think "now i wonder why they have chosen to put those there" maybe im too litteral in my thinking and conclusions. I can put down all the flaws with the projector to inexperience and time constraints on my part having never worked with them before but still cannot see what the hang up was?
ReplyDeleteTonight though was at another project space in which not one but 3 projectors were expertly used in interesting ways and also for the most part hidden from view (not that them being on view would have changed my opinion of the show)
I just see the discussion of these things as distracting and ultimately frustrating i guess.
oh and well done two pints shall be yours!
as was hinted at at some point...i wish the work was strong enough to make the convo regarding mode of display never happen. Is that possible in the pursuit of constructive crit?
ReplyDelete