Assignment Five - Prints for Assessment Submission

I have to admit that I've made a bit of a meal of the decision-making process about how to get this assignment printed.  As recorded before, I've felt that my own inkjet prints on archival matte paper produced the sharpest contrast and avoided issues with a reflective surface.  However, I have been keen to print to quite a large size, and have wholeheartedly accepted my tutor's recommendation to mount on card.  I was convinced that I could do my own spray-mounting, but despite a successful one-off experiment, subsequent efforts have not come up to the standard I would be looking for at Assessment.  The sorts of problems encountered included curling of the card due to different reactions as the adhesive dried and issues with getting a really neat final trim.  I might have eventually succeeded, with even more 'pain', time and expense (and I've managed with the Assignment One A4 prints), but I eventually decided to give in gracefully.  Getting professional, mounted inkjets at the size I wanted was going to prove hugely expensive, so I have eventually gone back to Peak Imaging's C-prints on their matte paper, which has meant accepting some surface reflection but I have managed to counter my contrast concerns with some further 'tweaking' of the file.  It hasn't been cheap but at least I'm now happy with the outcome.  They're printed at 30cm by 45cm, without borders (for the reason discussed before but perhaps worth repeating - there are 'borders' in a number of the images that appear in my assemblies & so printing with yet another border begins to look odd).

So - Assignment Five well and truly completed - it's been a fascinating process from which I've learned a very great deal.

Assignment Five - Printing for Assessment

Amongst other matters that will come up later on here, my telephone tutorial session on 15th November included discussion about the form of my submission for Assignment Five.  Since the last post on here, I have:

·     Had a trial professional print made of image 5, Sydney Cricket Ground (chosen because it had the most 'challenging' shades of white in the background), done by Peak Imaging, a C-print, at 393mm by 588mm, on Fuji Matt, mounted on 2mm card.

·     Compared that with my own inkjet prints, made on the Epson R2880, with its Ultrachrome pigment inks, using Epson Professional Matte paper, at A3 plus.  Beautifully printed and finished as the big C-print might be, I conclude that the inkjets are marginally better for this assignment:

§  Better contrast, giving very sharp edges and a greater sense of 'physicality' in the 'assemblies'.

§  More vivid colours, which also suits these images, I believe;

§  A wholly non-reflective surface.

 

Comparison of the surfaces - Epson Matte left & Fuji Matt right

2mm card mounting works well & provides a highly professional finish 

The combined effect is that the inkjets get closer to the sense that this is an actual collage, rather than an image of a collage.

·     Discussed this conclusion with my tutor, who can understand the reasoning and who has discouraged me from agonising too much about the issue and about the size of the prints, at this level of submission.

·     We also discussed the idea of doing my own mounting and maybe experimenting with dry-mounting, using an iron!  Having watched some videos (admittedly not professionally presented) on You-tube, I have some doubts, but will come back to that.

·     Considered professional inkjet printing & had a sample pack of papers from Printspace.  Interestingly, only two papers from the pack caught my eye.  One was the Fuji Matt that the Peak trial was done on - with the issues above - and the other was Hahnemuhle Photorag, for its wholly matte surface.  The Hahnemulle is beautiful paper, but it also has a cream look, compared to the strong white colour of my Epson Professional Matte.  The Hahnemulle sample print is a mono, and I can see how it performs superbly for that purpose, but I am concerned that it will not be so good for the vivid colours in my own images. 

So, all-in-all, I end up back with my own prints, but with the need to try doing my own mounting - perhaps.  I do not want the result to look amateurish, obviously, but I plan to do some experimentation.  I also have some spray mount, so might give that a try, too.

 

 

Assignment Five - feedback

I received my feedback on Assignment Five at the end of last week, and I'm pleased to say that it was good.  Some of the highlights were - "... a really original and challenging take on the brief ..."; "... feels thoughtfully executed but is also irreverent and fun ..."; "... solid content and ... sound analysis ..."; and "... only criticism ... might have tried too hard ... (some images) ... have a few too many elements ...".  The latter point was accompanied by two qualifications - that he wasn't entirely convinced that it was an issue but it's a possible criticism some might see, and the clear advice that I certainly shouldn't do any more work on it.  Actually, I do agree with the comment.  Having never done anything like this before I was, even after looking at others' work, learning as I went along.  Some of the busiest pieces were amongst the first.  This was the very first, for example.

As the assignment progressed, I began to see that simpler and cleaner compositions worked best.  The one below is probably my personal favourite - and that is partly down to its simplicity.  Stezaker's collage work usually involves the juxtaposition of no more than two photographs - but it still leaves plenty of scope for 'reading' - and, whilst I wouldn't compare the image below to the quality of what he has produced, it does share the simplicity and it does still have plenty to say.

 

Interestingly, Jesse selected the one below as his favourite of the set.  In some ways, it is quite a busy and complex image, with lots of elements.  But the difference, I suspect, is in its 'cleanness'.  There is a lot of white space; the composition is more careful and structured; and it has more of an abstract look.  This one - although very different in subject matter and content - is closer, in a formal sense, to the recent Laura Letinsky work that partly inspired me.  That too combines lots of clean white space with intense patches of colour.



 

Feedback on my prints is also encouraging.  The "... quality is good ..." with the inkjet "... providing ... crisp resolution and vivid colour ...".  That's pleasing; I wanted to get a crispness into them.  My idea is that a casual viewer should be drawn by the visual attractiveness but also, initially, slightly unsure as to whether they are 'real' physical collages rather than photographs.  He has a very good suggestion to make - that they should be printed to the edge of the paper, with no borders.  I have already re-done them in that way - and it works well.  We are, of course, encouraged to leave small borders on prints for assessment submission, to aid handling.  But these images are different, with plenty of 'white' space around them that can easily be handled.  I hadn't really managed to work it out for myself - perhaps because I was locked into the need for border - but the multiple frame effect that results from there being white bordered images within the frame of the overall composition resulted in some unnecessary confusion for the eye.  Printed large with no borders, they look much better. 

 

The other suggestions on prints are - that I should at least experiment with lab printing, and that having them dry mounted on card would be good for assessment submission.  Again - agreed on both counts; unless the print feedback had been 'these are amazingly good, don't bother any further', I had all along felt that I should try the professional print approach.  And the dry mounting certainly makes good sense.  So - one image has gone off to Peak Imaging to be printed at around A2 size and card-mounted.  I've chosen one that has some very subtle shades of off-white in the background and some vivid colour as well, so it should be a good opportunity to make a comparison.  I don't mind the cost of going down the professional approach and I like the idea of a further 'push' in size, but I don't want to lose the crispness I referred to above. 

 

There was an issues with the background of one image.  One of the early ones, it had been assembled on ivory card rather than the white paper I used for all the others.  It is this one.

 

I don't mind the ivory, but I did mention its difference in my notes, and Jesse comments on it too.  So, I have used a combination of Photoshop and Lightroom adjustments to get it to look as follows.  I needed to retain contrast in the background, though, partly to keep the shadow effect and also because there are faint (and deliberate) traces of the tape that fixed some of the images to the board, which would have been lost had I brightened it too much.

 

Another small factor that arose from printing to the edge of the paper was the realisation that I had used two slightly different size ratios.  I've now amended those so that all six match - particularly important if I do get them all professionally printed and mounted. 

And finally, I've arranged to have a telephone tutorial next week, to discuss my assessment submission and to also discuss my move on to Level Three.

Assignment Five - Progress Report 4

Assignment Five has gone off to my tutor this week - so awaiting feedback.  Something that went through my mind after sending it off is how my approach to submitting assignments has changed.  Whilst, of course, it still feels important to get the work to a high standard before sending off, there is more of a sense of 'work-in-progress' - which is a little different from early modules when one felt the need to impress by having everything perfect.  I'll get feedback and advice, then I'll do some more work, then (in March, for this module) I'll submit for assessment. Maybe this is also part of a transition to regarding it as 'my work' and not something to 'please' tutor/OCA etc.  I could, potentially, see ways to go on developing some of the ideas that have emerged during Assignments Four and Five.

In my last post, I mentioned that I might share my Assignment Five images with the OCA Flickr group.  I did, and was much encouraged by the feedback (thanks everyone!), a lot of which is here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7216643@N06/9784303254/

Assignment Five - Progress Report 3

I am going to prepare an Assignment Five  submission to my tutor before the end of September.  I don't think that will necessarily be the end of the story - I can envisage further development before going to the March Assessment session - but I have six images at a stage where they can be submitted for feedback.  They are below; and there is background on what I've been doing in these previous posts:- http://stansocapwdp.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Assignment-Five.  (And, please note, the intended outcome is large prints.) (I am aware that one has a different coloured background!)

Assignment 5 - 1

 

Assignment 5 - 2

 

Assignment 5 - 3

 

Assignment 5 - 4

 

Assignment 5 - 5

 

Assignment 5 - 6

 

 



As the previous posts explain, the brief for this assignment is to photograph an event - planning, photographing, processing, and publicising, in a photo-journalistic/documentary context.  I have chosen to stretch that brief somewhat - producing my own response to a significant sporting event of Summer 2013, the Ashes Series of Test Matches between England and Australia.  The 'process' has been as follows:

·     The original images have come from a wide range of sources - second hand books; newspapers; Google image searching; Flickr; a specialist cricket site; even my own living room (Image 4).

·     Each of my six images started as a 'rough', before assembling the version seen here.  In some cases, the original image (cut from a book, say) has been used; but in many cases the original has been re-photographed and re-sized, to scale in with my assembly.  Most have been cut in some way, with a craft knife.

·     These 'assemblies' (feels like the right word to describe what I've done) are deliberately 'transparent' and even a little crude in places. (I refer to Letinsky, Blalock, Stezaker etc, in the other posts.)  They have been lit (using 2 studio lights) to try and emphasise the 'cut and paste' aesthetic; and then re-photographed to produce a large-file digital image of the assembly, as it appeared in 'my studio' (don't actually have one - but that's the principle).

·     As well as processing ready to print, some have had subsequent 'pixel' processing (moving, cloning, deleting etc), partly to improve the image, but also to quite deliberately confuse the eye in the detail.

·     I have printed each at A3+ (13"x19") for submission to my tutor.  (Worth saying that I am not 100% sure about my own printing & need the feedback on them now.  I may subsequently have to go for external printing - and I might even consider pushing the size larger again for Assessment submission [If I can get away with it!])

I have also taken the opportunity to reflect, again, on what this is all about!!  Reflections that I will share here ...

·     The projects origins lie in my Assignment Four research of contemporary still life photography - specifically the likes of Laura Letinsky and Lucas Blalock - but there are also, clearly, links to John Stezaker's combining of found images to make something new, something that says something different.

·     The images are, of course, in response to a brief.  I think there is an element of subversion - subverting the implied notion in the course notes that 'professional standards' = getting one's photo-journalistic work published in the media.  But hopefully it is a creative, thoughtful and imaginative response to the notion of photographing an event.  [The 'event', one might say, was my sticking together a few scraps of paper.  Or, am I photographing a series of mythical events that never really happened?]

·     There is also intended to be some 'real' response, beyond the hint of intellectualising above (and below).  The images do actually illustrate social and historical change.  Image 5 has a highly 'posed' Australian batsman (from the 1880s, as it happens) looking somewhat overwhelmed by the ways in which the game (the world?) has changed by 2013.  And it is also my intention that this bringing together of images from all sorts of sources (and times) might suggest some reflection on the ways in which today's photographers, faced with image saturation, can respond to events.  It has certainly occurred to me that one might produce similar responses to current affairs at all sorts of levels.

·     Then, perhaps returning to the intellectualising, I am trying to explore the layers of image-making - prints of paintings, copies of old photos, colour prints in books, to internet-based imagery, TV pictures, graphics, and then digital manipulation.  And, in the final prints, (and partly in response to the Letinsky prints I saw at the Photographers Gallery), I am interested in the surface of the photographic print - what can we do with that flat surface? what depth of visual impact can it generate?  I'm not so sure I will get there on this final issue - but the exploration is part of the point of the project.

So - a submission to my tutor by the end of the month; probably, I will share these images in the OCA Flickr group, too; and I may still look at producing two composite portraits - the archetypal 'English' and 'Australian' cricketer.  The course brief also asks for evidence of 'marketing' the work.  It's not at that stage yet - but I should probably give it a go.



Assignment Five - Progress Report 2

I got a supportive e-mail from my tutor during the visit to Arles, which was good news.  I am encouraged to carry on "off piste" with the assignment and he likes the "simple cut and paste aesthetic".  There is, I think, a challenge in trying to retain some of that whilst also looking to achieve 'professional standards' in the final image/print - a challenge but not unachievable.  One thing has become very clear to me over the last ten days (and it was no great surprise) - I am never going to get to the standard of finish that I want with my D80 camera.  it has some serious limitations (pixel count; noise in low light; old DX sensor) and is in serious need of a sensor clean.  So - one very significant piece of progress since last week is illustrated in this image.

I am now the proud owner of a NIKON D800.  I am not a kit freak and I resist wholeheartedly the temptation to always have the latest gadget - but there comes a time!  I also bought an Interfit 3-head studio lighting kit a few weeks ago - so, here we see the simple set-up that I have been using to start making some images for the assignment.

Turning to the images themselves, I have moved the two originals on from the 'sketches' included in the last post.  In the following version, all images in the compilation have been processed more carefully for colour, tonal balance etc (though they remain somewhat basic, being, in several cases, cut-outs from books or small downloaded images), and have been printed on photographic paper (and subsequently cut out with a craft knife).

It feels more like a 'quality' image but there is some loss of the 'cut and paste' aesthetic.  I even curled the edges of some of the images a little to introduce some shadow and depth.  The images are quite crudely fixed to the backing paper, so that there is shadow and depth to the foreground 'painting', for example.  The new version of my other 'original' actually combines photo paper and plain paper.

The black and white scene in the very centre (from the Bodyline Ashes series in the 1930s) is printed on plain paper and has curled more under the lights.  It helps achieve the 'transparency' of process that I have referred to elsewhere, and is close to the Letinsky aesthetic, too.

I also have a third image now - where I have varied the scale.

I'm quite pleased with this one, as it has a crude simplicity about it - something like a 'still life' image - but manages to combine all sorts of elements of image-making.  The background, for example, is a cropped screen-grab from the internet site, Cricinfo, showing the 'Hawk-Eye' presentation of a ball with which England bowler, Graeme Swann, dismissed Australian batsman, Rogers, in the Fourth Test of this summer.  But that very 21st century 'aesthetic' (if that's an appropriate word!) is being linked to Jim Laker's polite appeal to an umpire in the 1950s, as he seems to bowl to a 1940s Don Bradman.  This is the kind of combination which, if processed and printed at a suitable quality level, would, I hope, interest the viewer but also raise questions about what exactly I've done and, maybe, why?

I have other ideas to work on - an image based around a television view of the game, for example, and I might even have a go at a 'portrait'. - and all images will, eventually, be subject to more 'processing'.

Assignment Five - Progress Report 1

I am making this post with some degree of trepidation, but I am going on holiday next Wednesday, for two weeks, and I think it's time to 'go public' on what I'm doing with Assignment Five.  Before I go, I want to share it with my tutor, and with anyone else who is kind enough to read my blog.  I have been recording the process in a separate notebook/'sketchbook' & this post won't cover all the detail of what I'm up to, but it should be enough to give a flavour.  My trepidation arises from a) the fact that I am still, to an extent, testing out the idea, meaning that what appears here will be, sort of, 'sketches'; and b) a recognition that it might be read by some (and perhaps rightly!) as complete nonsense.  Anyway, here goes ...

I have written a kind of mini-proposal, which has been agreed with my tutor, and which is here in this document.

One very important context is the Laura Letinsky 'still life' work that I've written about before, and which is best viewed here - Ill Form and Void Full - Photographers Gallery - but I would also point to the Daniel Gordon link mentioned in my 'proposal', which is here - Daniel Gordon.

 
So far, I have produced 'sketches' or 'mock-ups' of two images.  They are certainly not intended to be finished versions; though I should stress that some of the 'transparency of process' will remain - look at the Laura Letinsky work.  Here they are:

 

Assignment Five - Rough 1

 

Assignment Five - Rough 2

 

 

I don't know whether it is obvious, but there has been a lot of work behind these and, as I say, I have written up detailed notes of the background in a separate notebook, but I've also done a background 'presentation' of how the second of these has evolved, which is here (click on it to view large and read):



 



 

 

 

 

 

 

I need to stress that I see the final outcome of this process as a set of high quality prints - so anything viewed digitally will inevitably fall short of my objective.  I'm tempted to try and explain further but I think I might leave it here, as a progress report.

 

Assignment Four: a critical review (plus some “angst”)

I completed this assignment yesterday and submitted it to my tutor.  I’ve been very focused on that over the last month – together with work and family commitments, but I’m now taking the opportunity to reflect on the assignment, but also on a touch of “where am I” and “what am I doing”!

Starting with the assignment, I’ve quite enjoyed researching the still life genre and writing it up.  My title is “The still life genre is alive, well, and relevant to contemporary photographic practice”.  I think what I’ve done is interesting, in relation to current art photographic practice, and I’m broadly happy with the outcome. (Though I have to admit it’s about 10% over the word count.)

Thinking about the process, it has turned out to be more journal and internet based, in the research, than book based.  Most of all, that reflects a relative shortage of ‘serious’ written material on still life photography.  It certainly has, I suspect, in some peoples’ minds, connotations of pretty arrangements at the local camera club.  But I was focusing on “now”, which is another reason that the research was as it was.  There aren’t many books I could have consulted.  These two did feature : "Still Life in Photography" by Paul Martineau and "Stilled: contemporary still life phtography by women" - Eds. Newton & Rolph.  Gallery websites tend to produce quite a lot of good supporting material these days, of course; so I’ve also been sourcing material from National Media Museum, National Gallery, Photographers Gallery and the Museum of Fine Arts Boston, to name just a few.

Essentially, the thrust of my Critical Review essay is that, despite having been seen as a ‘lesser’ genre than, say documentary or landscape, still life thrives and is, if anything, seeing a revival amongst contemporary photographic artists.  I’ve also sought to demonstrate that this is not so unusual or surprising.  The Dutch still life painters experimented with symbolism at a time when the reformed church condemned idolatry.  The early photographers experimented with still life, not least because it stayed still long enough for their long exposures.  The surrealists experimented with still life and collage as they explored the medium’s creative possibilities.  So, today, when the growth of digital and web-based imagery calls into question the whole notion of what a photograph is, no great surprise that many take to their studios and explore that very issue.

My essay makes reference to three artists in particular – Laura Letinsky, Ori Gersht and Lucas Blalock.  I’ve presented Blalock as a ‘typical’ example of a ‘younger’ contemporary photographer – but there are plenty of others.  He is the interviewer in an Aperture article featuring Jeff Wall.  There seems to be a degree of tension (perhaps a bit too strong a word) between Blalock & peers and the previous generation, such as Wall, Gursky etc.  Wall suggests that Blalock’s work demonstrates a degree of “angst”.  Now, I’m picking up on that word.  It’s something I feel I can relate to.

I’ve written in here before about the attraction of doing some conceptual still life work, and have even done one or two tentative experiments.  Researching and writing the essay hasn’t lessened that interest.  When I read about Blalock and others, I feel some affinity with what they’re doing – this video of Blalock and his "99c store still lifes", for example.  I do, genuinely, find the ‘intellectualising’ and ‘theorising’ interesting, too (feels like a confessional!).

But then, another side kicks in and asks the question “Am I in danger of disappearing up my own a***, with too much analysis and soul searching?”  There is a bit of me wonders if it’s really ‘copping out’.  Get out there and make some proper pictures, Stan!!  Push yourself into some documentary work; find some people subjects; get in touch with the real world; and various other such thoughts!

Assignment Five beckons; and it is going to force me to face up to this dilemma.  The brief, in the course notes, is very much directed towards photojournalism.  It is, essentially, about photographing an event and seeking to ‘market’ the outcome to publications and organisations.  It is a direction that goes totally against the grain of where I am just now (not the marketing bit, by the way, OK with that).

Part Five of the course is titled ‘Professional standards’, which is a wholly desirable topic and an area where I definitely have some developing to do.  But do I want to pursue it by covering some local event and marketing my photos to the local press or magazines?  I don’t.  But – would it actually be of more benefit to me if I did stick to the brief and make myself do it?  Yes, it’s been done countless times before by others and I may come away frustrated that I’m not doing something original or something that excites me – but that might do me good!

I can’t resolve this at the moment, but I’m going to have to if I want to keep up the momentum. I feel the “angst”!!

[Actually, I do have an idea washing around that might possibly get me out of it; though it isn’t an easy one and might be a step too far.  What if I produced a series of images about an ‘event’ without actually being there??]