352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Presentation Options Experiment

As you may have seen through some of my previous blog posts, for this module I have collected a variety of data (including photographs, audio and collected materials). Now that all of this data has been collected, the next stage of my projects development is to experiment with different presentation ideas for my final collection.

Below you will therefore be able to find brief information regarding the methodology of the experiment, each of the presentation options including information regarding the reasoning’s behind experimenting with different ideas (including whether they were influenced by different artists/photographers), photographs of the display I experimented with, a brief reflection on the presentation, followed by a generalized after-though and reflection section where I discuss my presentation method:

 



 

METHODOLOGY:

For this Presentation Options experiment, I decided to print off some test prints for each of the possibilities, and spent a day in university constructing these test prints into the presentation options I was considering.

Now, before this experiment, I was originally thinking of printing the landscape photo at the size of 60x50cm, so for this experiment, I decided to half this dimension for the test prints (so that they were 30x25cm), in order to try and keep the same ratio as the current planned size. As you will see below, there are also some slightly smaller test prints that are a quarter of the size of the original dimensions and therefore half the size of the experiment test prints (15×12.5cm). This was, once again, created in order to try and keep the same ratio the landscape photo as it is this aspect that I will be basing all of the outer presentation features off of. (Please note, however, that once these presentation option experiments have been completed, I will take the time to organize the final sizing of the piece).

As you will see below, I also decided to use only one photograph from the collection (the “Buttermere” image – as this is most likely going to be the photograph that I show within the exhibition space) in order to keep a consistency between the experiments so that they’re easier to compare. With this being said, however, similar to the sizing, once I have decided on the final presentation option, I will obviously take the time to experiment with all five of the chosen photographs, in the presentation option that I have chosen.

Finally, for these experiments, as some of them include textual aspects, I had to use sample text that I found online as I was yet to experiment with the style of writing that I wanted to employ within the accompanying text. However, if I decide to include text within the final piece, I will obviously spend time experimenting with the style before writing numerous drafts until I am happy with the accompanying result.

 



 

PRESENTATION OPTIONS:

 

Single Photo:

Single Photo

The first presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP was the display of a single landscape photograph that I had created. I wanted to experiment with this particular idea in order to see whether a single image provided the viewer with enough information to understand the (personal) concept and themes surrounding my project.

As discussed throughout my FMP developmental stages, I chose the “middle-of-the-road” composition and leading line perspective because, due to the fact that it draws the viewers attention into the image, I thought that the directionality that these images create could be used as a visual representation regarding the fact that these particular pathways have triggered a psychological pathway to the recollection of memories (that I have of Grandpa), which I recall in these particular landscape locations.

However, as suggested throughout both my research and development stages for my FMP, although this particular aesthetic choice could be used to represent this aspect, I think that I need other accompanying aspects (for example, text or objects) in order to anchor or aid the viewer’s engagement and contextualized understanding of the project.

I have therefore decided not to use this particular presentation option as the display of my FMP.

 


 

Single Photo with Intricate Text:

Single Photo (with Text)

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP was the display of a single landscape photograph that incorporated accompanying text over the actual image. As suggested above, I wanted to experiment with the inclusion of accompanying aspects, such as text, in order to see if it enhanced the viewer’s contextualized understanding of the project.

Now, this particular idea was influenced by the research that I conducted regarding Svetlana Kopystiansky’s “Seascape” that I came across in the “Art and Text” publication (for the research that I completed surrounding this particular piece, please visit the “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Academic Research” post), where he covered all of his images with small, intricate text. As suggested in the reflection of this particular piece of research, I therefore thought that I should experiment with this particular technique as I thought that it could symbolize a personal ideology regarding the fact that, although I see these beautiful landscapes, for me, they are also tinted and covered in my personal memories of Grandpa.

Although I feel that this technique could indeed be used to symbolize this concept, after experimenting with this presentation, apart from the fact that the sample text I used was far too big (which, if I decide to continue with this display option, I will obviously take the time adjusting the size of my written text to create a successful and aesthetically pleasing result), I personally feel that this particular technique reduces the importance of both the landscape and the text. This therefore means that the viewer will be unable to fully concentrate on the individual aspect of the piece (the text and the image), resulting in a decreased understanding of the context surrounding the project (i.e. the viewer is not able to draw visual and textual information from both pieces to allow them to contextualize a meaning behind the photograph and the project).

I have therefore decided not to use this particular presentation option as the display of my FMP.

 


 

Diptych with Photograph and Text (x2):

Diptych with Large Text:

IMG_6995

 

Diptych’s with Small Text:

 

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP was the display of varying diptychs that incorporate both the photograph and the text (the varying aspect refers to the size and position of the text in relation to the image). As suggested above, I wanted to experiment with the inclusion of accompanying aspects, such as text, in order to see if it enhanced the viewer’s contextualized understanding of the project.

Following the experiment regarding the use of text over the image, the next logical presentation technique to consider was the use of a diptych. Now, this particular experiment was actually influenced by suggestions from a number of different lecturers (including Emma Critchley and David Rule – please see the blog post entitled “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 12 (One-to-One Tutorials with Emma Critchley, David Rule and Caroline Molloy)”) as I was originally contemplating the use of a triptych (that included a collected object, the landscape photograph, and a piece of text – which I have experimented with below), but they suggested that I needed to consider the reason behind the inclusion of the object and whether the piece would work as a simple diptych.

As you can see from the diptych photographs above (as well as it being briefly suggested in the experiments introduction), I therefore trialed different sizing and positions of the text (which I will explain in more detail below), but I decided to incorporate the text to the right of the image throughout each of this mini experiments. This is because, not only is this the stereotypical positioning of accompanying text within an exhibition, but I also took into account the generic way of reading (left to right) as I wanted the viewer to experience the photograph first before moving onto using the accompanying text to contextualize the image and the work.

The first experimentation that I underwent using this particular diptych technique was the use of text that was the same size of the image. Now, although this should technically balance the importance of the image and the text, I soon found that the text actually overshadowed the significance of the photo (and the vast landscape depicted), and therefore greatly affected my original plan of allowing the viewer to be drawn to the image first, before contextualizing it with the accompanying text (as suggested above).

Taking this into account, I then decided to experiment with smaller text to see if this manipulated the viewers reading of the piece (where they view the larger image before the text). Finding that the smaller text did exactly this, and that it was more successful than the larger text in terms of the reading structure I wanted to achieve, I then decided that I needed to experiment with their positioning in relation to the landscape image.

As seen from the photographs included above, I therefore started the experiment with the small text by aligning them to the centre of the landscape photograph which, although they obviously vary in size, actually created an aesthetic balance between the photo and the text, due to the fact that the centralized position of the text could be used to represent and enhance the “middle-of-the-road” composition I created within my images, thus referencing the relationship between the text and the photo.

I then experimented with aligning the smaller text towards the bottom of the image, and soon found that this wasn’t as successful as the centralized positioning of the text as it appeared too distant (in terms of relationship) from the image due to it’s positioning referencing that of an artist statement (rather than an accompanying aspect within the exhibition piece). Bearing this particular analysis in mind, I therefore decided not to experiment with the positioning of the smaller text towards the top of the landscape photograph, as I thought that this would result in a similar analysis.

After conducting this experiment, I therefore feel that I am definitely going to include accompanying text within my final piece (due to it’s ability to aid the viewers contextualized understanding of the project), and personally feel that the smaller text in a central position next to the image is more successful than the other diptych technique I experimented with. This therefore means that, when incorporating this diptych idea into future experiments, I will be using this particular positioning, unless I decide to change it due to the particular technique I am experimenting with at the time.

 


 

Handwritten Text:

Diptych (Handwritten text)

After conducting the experiment regarding the diptych technique and the incorporation of accompanying text, I then decided to experiment with the aesthetics of the written piece and decided to see what it looked like in a handwritten format.

Now, this particular idea was influenced by the research that I conducted into Alfred Wainwright’s “A Pictorial Guide to the Lakeland Fells” (please see the blog post “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Technical Research”) because, as suggested in my research, I thought that the use of the handwritten text could be used to enhance the personal aspect of my project whilst also adding an extra empathetic level to the text.

However, after completing this particular aesthetic experiment, although I feel that it could indeed enhance the personal aspect of the project, I think that it appears amateur-ish and messy (which could merely be due to the fact that, as it was an experiment, I didn’t take as much time and care creating the handwritten piece), thus decreasing the professionalism of the piece.

I therefore think that the accompanying text I include within my final piece will be typed, but I will spend time choosing the appropriate font and size to symbolize the personal aspect of the project, whilst also enhancing it’s professionalism.

I have therefore decided not to use this particular aesthetic option as a part of the display within my FMP.

 


 

Triptych with Fading Text:

Triptych with Fading Text (Central Alignment):

Triptych (Fading text)

 

Triptych with Fading Text (Different Layouts):

 

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP was the use of varying triptychs that focused primarily on the inclusion of the landscape photograph and two pieces of accompanying text (the varying aspect refers to the position of the text in relation to the image). As you will be able to see from the photograph included above, the first piece of accompany text (situated to the left of the image) includes slightly faded text with tiny sections of easy to read words, and the second piece of accompanying text (situated to the right of the image) is the same piece of text but with more “easy to read” rather than the faded words.

This particular idea came to me whilst I was researching into memory triggers and recollection during my 350MC Working with Photography in Context (Symposium) module, as I thought that the aesthetic of this text could be used to represent the recollection process I underwent throughout this project, by symbolizing the fact that my memories (represented by the text) were faded and fragmented before visiting the location (the text on the left), then, when I visited the location (the middle, landscape photograph), this therefore triggered the recollection of a more dense memory (the text on the right). This could therefore make my personal project more accessible to the viewer as, like suggested in my two revised proposals (please see the blog posts “352MC Professional Photographic Practice –Revised Proposal” and “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Second Revised Proposal”), as well as a one-to-one session that I had with Emma Critchley (please see “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 12 (One-to-One Tutorials with Emma Critchley, David Rule and Caroline Molloy)”), this would be using my personal memories as an examples to allow the viewer to begin to understand the process of recollection. This also, obviously, enhances the academic contextualization of the project (rather than the personal) thus, once again, enhancing the viewer’s accessibility.

However, similar to the feedback that David Moore gave me in a one-to-one tutorial where he suggested that the text in my work shouldn’t have different affectations to describe the thing that I am looking at (please see the blog post “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 9 (One-to-One Tutorials with David Moore and Caroline Molloy)”), I am unsure whether this aesthetic textual technique will be spoon-feeding the viewer, as I personally feel that the content of the accompanying text that I will be writing will successfully suggest this process of recollection (through it’s reference to both the present and the past) without the need of this aesthetic feature. (However, I can’t fully make a decision on this matter, until I write the accompanying pieces of text).

Within this experiment, as suggested in the introduction, I also decided to change the central position of the accompanying text so that they were situated towards the bottom of the image as, due to the fact that their was two of them on wither side f the photo, I thought these different positioning’s could be used to symbolize the path within the photograph. However, after conducting these layout options, I soon realized that the represented the aesthetics of the photograph too literally, and that they actually decreased the professionalism of the work due to the amateur appearance associated with these literal layout options.

After conducting this particular experiment, I therefore feel that the use of this fading text technique (when it is positioned centrally) could be used to create a successful final piece but, as suggested above, this output can not be finalized and chosen until I have written the accompanying text, as well as completing the other presentation experiments to see if there is one that is more successful.

 


 

Triptych with a Collected Object, Landscape Photo, and Text:

 

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP was the use of a triptych that incorporated a collected object from the trips to the Lake District, my landscape photograph, and a piece of accompanying text. As suggested above when experimenting with the diptych presentation options, (as well as in my second revised proposal and one-to-one discussions with different lecturers – please see the blog posts “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Second Revised Proposal” and “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 12 (One-to-One Tutorials with Emma Critchley, David Rule and Caroline Molloy)”) this particular technique was the adjusted idea (from the original plan found in my first proposal – please see “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Original Proposal”) that I thought would be successful to use as my final piece.

As you will see from the photographs included above I therefore decided to experiment with the inclusion of only one of the objects from the location. This is because, as suggested in a one-to-one tutorial where we discussed the still-life images that I created (please see the blog post entitled “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 13 (One-to-One Tutorial with Anthony Luvera)”), Anthony suggested that the still-lives that document singular objects are more successful than the grouped objects due to the fact that they are individual and simple. This therefore meant that I chose a single object that I thought best represented the location (shown through the representational nature of it’s form, shape and type), which, as there was only one of them, wouldn’t overpower the importance of the landscape photograph.

Now, when discussing the incorporation of the collected object within a triptych with a number of different tutors, as suggested above under the Diptych experimentation, they suggested that I needed to carefully consider the reason behind the inclusion of the object. With this being said, however, after completing this experiment, I personally feel that the inclusion of the object actually enhanced the final piece as it created an interesting installation which could be used to engage the viewers attention, whilst also acting as an immersive reference to the landscape within the photo (through it’s authenticity and representation associations with regards to it’s form, shape and type, as suggested above), thus enhancing the viewers accessibility. The inclusion of the object, also symbolized the documentarian, topographic survey of the landscape that I underwent throughout the project (through it’s reference to an archival piece), as well as the physical revisiting of the places, thus enhancing the representation of my methodology within the piece (which is a major part of the projects concept).

However, bearing this in mind, as you will be able to see from the photographs included above, the objects that I used within the experiment where unable to be reduced in size to fit with the ratio of the photograph and the text and so I decided to experiment with the incorporation of a smaller, similar, but slightly more “boring” object to try and achieve a similar ratio to what I was expecting. These aspects, therefore, obviously adjusted the perspective of successfulness with regards to the display. However, within this final piece, if I were to use this technique, I would obviously choose a more interesting single object in order to further engage the viewers interest, as well as making it so that the object and the text are approximately the same size in order to increase the balance of the piece (which will also both be smaller than the final photo due to the reasons suggested above regarding the reading and balancing of the project). (Please note, however, that although the object engages the viewers attention, acting as their entry point into the project, due to the left-to-right reading, as well as the size of the photo, the landscape photograph will still remain the dominant aspect, and both the object and the text will be the accompanying features that contextualize the images concept).

After completing this experiment, I personally feel that this is the most successful presentation option so far (overtaking that of the triptych with fading text) and I therefore feel, at this point in time, I will be using this technique for my final piece.

 


 

Triptych with a Still-Life Photo, Landscape Photo, and Text:

Triptych with a Still-Life Photo, Landscape Photo, and Text:

Triptych (Still-Life, Photo, Text)

 

Triptych with a Still-Life Photo, Landscape Photo, and Text (Jon’s Suggestion):

 

Triptych with a Still-Life Photo, Landscape Photo, and Text (Multiple Still-Lives):

 

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP was the use of varying triptychs that incorporated a (couple of) still-life image(s) of the collected materials, my landscape photograph, and a piece of accompanying text (the varying aspect not only refers to the inclusion of multiple still-lives, but also refers to the position of the still-lives in relation to the image). This was because, during Formative Feedback Review (please see “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 7 (Formative Feedback Review)”), Anthony Luvera suggested that I should experiment with the creation of still-life images of the objects and, after completing this experiment (please see “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Still-Life Experiment”), I stated that I thought these could be a successful accompanying feature within my final piece, and therefore wanted to experiment with their inclusion to determine which was more successful: the inclusion of the object or the inclusion of the still-life.

(Please note, if I do decide to use the still-life images within my final piece, I will obviously be cropping them to the same size as the text to created balanced accompanying features).

Within this experiment, I therefore trialed the inclusion of just a single still-life image (to replicate the singular object in the previous experiment), as well as the inclusion of more than one still-life to see which one created a greater representation of the documented landscape.

For the singular still-life images, I experimented with a number of different layouts, including some layouts that were suggested by our technician, Jon Legge, during a discussion that I had with him about my presentation options (found below).

Single Still-life

The first layout I decided to experiment with for the single still-life image triptych was the central position of the object so that it was in line with the text (similar to the fading text triptych experimented with above) as, like suggested previously, this creates a balance within the piece without taking the importance away from the landscape photograph.

The other layouts that I experimented with for the single still-life image triptych were the layouts that Jon Legge suggested during our discussion. However, after experimenting with these layouts, although I think they could be used to reference that of a geographical journal (representing the documentarian and survey-like methodology of the project), I personally feel that they are too clumped together and think that, for this particular piece, they need to be spread out in order to symbolize the vastness of the landscape.

As for the inclusion of the multiple still-life images, I decided to experiment with the inclusion of all of the objects that I collected from this location, in order to see, as suggested above, if they enhanced the representation of the landscape depicted. For the inclusion of these multiple still-lives I therefore decided to experiment with two different layout options.

The first of these layouts was the incorporation of the still-life images in a vertical formation, down the left side of the photograph. I decided to experiment with this particular idea as I thought that it could possibly be used to symbolize the angular aspect of the path within the image, but once I had created this layout, I thought that t was very aesthetically awkward and harsh, taking away from the softness of the piece and the symbolic representation of the projects personal aspect.

The next layout that I decided to experiment with was a more “flowy” layout because, as suggested in a one-to-one tutorial with Anthony Luvera (please see “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 13 (One-to-One Tutorial with Anthony Luvera)”), the freeness of the display could be used to emulate the randomness of the nature within the landscape depicted. However, one aspect that I noticed in relation to this particular layout was the fact that it will change dramatically depending on how many objects I collected from the specific location, and I will also have to carefully consider the flow that the layout creates in conjunction with moving the viewers eye onto the other aspects included within the final piece.

With all of this being said, however, although I thought that this layout for the multiple still-life images was more successful than the vertical line layout, I personally feel that the inclusion of a single still-life image within the triptych is more successful than the incorporation of multiple still-life images as it creates a balance within the piece without taking away or overshadowing the other accompanying aspects.

After completing this experiment, however, I personally prefer the use of the actual object as I feel that this creates a more visually interesting piece that engages the viewers attention, whilst also creating a slightly more immersive piece by representing the physical landscape as well as suggesting the projects methodology (of me physically revisiting these place), thus enhancing the concept of the project.

I have therefore decided not to use this particular presentation option as the display of my FMP.

 


 

Book:

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP was the use of a book. Although this was initially my original plan for my final piece (along with a final print and an archive display case – as suggested my original proposal, please see “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Original Proposal”) as I thought that this would enhance the personal aspect associated with the memories that I am exploring within the project (due to the fact that both memories and book can be closed off to the world), as briefly mentioned within my FMP development (including within the two revised proposal – please see “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Revised Proposal” and “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Second Revised Proposal”), I suggested that, instead of closing off my project in a book, I wanted to embrace the fact that I was sharing my stories by displaying them in an open exhibition space for everyone to see (whilst using other aspect within the piece to symbolize the personal). With this being said, however, I still decided that I wanted to briefly experiment with this idea (through creating Photoshop mock-ups of different page layouts that I could include), to see if I made the right decision to exclude the idea.

For this experiment, I therefore trialed a number of different layouts that were either inspired by some of the displays I had experimented with above (with the use of a still-life image rather than the physical object, obviously), or that came from our technician, Jon Legge, when we had a discussion regarding my presentation options (found below).

Book

The first layout I therefore decided to experiment with was the layout I created during the “Triptych” experiments, that included a still-life of the object, a larger landscape image, and a piece of accompanying text the same size as the still-life. However, as you can see from the Photoshop mock-up included above, this layout obviously worked well as an exhibition piece, but wasn’t as successful in a book layout due to the guttering.

Bearing this in mind, to remove the guttering problem, the next layout that I therefore experimented with was the use of this same triptych idea but reduced to a smaller size so that it fitted on a singular page. However, I personally think that this layout also doesn’t work as I feel that the triptych is far too small for the viewer to experience the same level of interest, engagement and immersion.

Finally, the last layout that I experimented with was that which resembled a catalogue layout (due to it’s inclusion of a number of different aspects), where, similar to the previous (“Triptych with a Still-Life Photo, Landscape Photo, and Text”) I decided to include multiple still-life images. I therefore decided to experiment with this technique as I personally thought that it could reference that of a geographical journal, which, as suggested above, could represent the documentarian and survey-like methodology of the project. However, after completing this mini layout experiment, I soon found that it focused too much on the physical and literal attributes of the landscape, thus taking away from the conceptual aspect of the project.

After experimenting with this book presentation option, as briefly mentioned above, I feel that I made the right decision to exclude this display idea as a final piece due to the “closed-off” and small size of the object (this wouldn’t represent the fact that I have embraced the idea of sharing my personal memories, and I also feel that the piece will need to be larger to represent the expanse of the landscape, in order to create an engaging and immersive piece).

I have therefore decided not to use this particular presentation option as the display of my FMP.

 


 

Archive Display Case:

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP, referring back to my initial presentation plan which can be found in my original proposal (please see “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Original Proposal”) was the use of an archive box. Within this “archive display case” (which was merely a white table during the experiment, but if I choose to continue with the inclusion of this aspect, I would arrange to purchase a professional glass display case), I therefore decided to include a map of the Lake District that highlighted the area where the photograph was taken, collected materials from the landscape depicted in the photograph, Polaroid’s of the experience I had on the weekend when the photo was taken, and some of my Grandpa’s photos that also documented the same area (which were all suggested in the original proposal). I therefore, originally, wanted to experiment with the inclusion of all of these aspects to show and represent the methodology and reasoning’s behind my projects creation, in order to provide the viewer with other pieces of information that would allow them to create a contextualized understanding of the project, thus increasing their accessibility. However, after experimenting with this particular idea, I feel that this could be achieved in much subtler ways.

For example, the inclusion of the map enhances the viewer’s focus onto the geographical location of the image (making the image appear too literal), which is more subtly achieved through the inclusion of the landscape photo. The use of the polaroid’s that I created to document the methodology behind the project also increases the focus of the viewer onto this particular aspect, which takes away from the more personal concept regarding the memories and can also be more subtly achieved through the inclusion of a physical object (as suggested in a previous experiment). Finally, as for Grandpa’s photographs, although I wanted to include these to show the reasoning/inspiration behind the projects creation, this will be more subtly understood through the accompanying text that I create and the artist statement included within the catalogue.

After experimenting with this particular display option, I personally feel that the archive display box enhances the busyness of the piece, and the more literal aspects of the project, and can be seen as a huge distraction from the mounted photo and text. Also, as briefly suggested above, I feel that the inclusion of all of these aspects within the archive display case is unnecessary as the concepts that they are representing have already been achieved in more successfully presentation options.

However, with this being said, I do think that a singular archival display would have been successful to include within a solo exhibition where it shows the methodology of the whole of the project, rather than a singular piece of work.

I have therefore decided not to use this particular presentation option as the display of my FMP.

 


 

Path Installation:

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP (as suggested within my second revised proposal and formative feedback session – please see the blog posts entitled “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Second Revised Proposal” and “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 11 (Second Formative Feedback Review and Output Considerations Discussion)”) was the creation of an installation piece where the collected materials from all of the trips up to the Lake District create a bordered off pathway to the image on the wall (referencing the path in the photo), and printing the accompanying “memory” text on the floor, within the boundaries of the path. As suggested within the second revised proposal, the reason for this is to create as a way of physically representing the process of recollection I underwent throughout this project (walking on a path to a particular location that triggered the remembrance of some of my fading memories).

As you will see from the photographs included above, I also decided to experiment with an alternative version of the installation where, instead of writing the text within the paths boundaries, I included it underneath the photograph in order to try and suggested that I have walked down a path to end up at the recollected memory (represented by the image and the text). However, as you will see, the ration of the photo and text, in comparison to the path installation, are clearly not correct (due to the fact that I have included smaller test print sizes), and this obviously affects the perspective regarding the successfulness of the piece.

However, as soon as I placed the path down in front of the image, I knew that I didn’t want to use this installation (or any adaptations of the installation, for example, the text on the floor or on the wall), as I thought that it presented a too literal a representation of the projects concept, whilst also distracting the viewers attention away from both the photograph and the text (the two main aspects that contextualize the piece).

I have therefore decided not to use this particular presentation option as the display of my FMP.

 


 

Inclusion of Ambient Audio:

352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Final Exhibition Piece: Ambient Audio Experiment from Holly Constantine on Vimeo.

 

Password: finalpieceambientaudio

 

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP was the inclusion of ambient audio to accompany my final piece. As suggested within the experiment where I created the soundscapes of the ambient audio (please see the blog post entitled “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Ambient Audio Experiment”) I stated that I didn’t think these soundscapes were successful enough to act as individual pieces, but that they may work well as an accompanying aspect in order to enhance the viewers immersion in the landscape depicted.

However, when I experimented with the inclusion of this ambient audio alongside the presentation option I currently preferred (the triptych with a collected object, landscape photo, and text – which has been included in the video as a Photoshop mock-up of the final exhibition piece), I soon found that this could appear to be overwhelming for the viewer as it provided them with too much information for them to take in to create a successful contextualized understanding of the project. I also noticed that the inclusion of this aspect was also taking away from the conceptuality of the project as it created a particular reading suggestion that I was trying to recreate the landscapes environment when I am actually attempting to express it in a personal and conceptual manner.

I have therefore decided not to use this particular presentation option as the display of my FMP.

 


 

Inclusion of the Interview with my Dad:

Interview Video from Holly Constantine on Vimeo.

 

Password: finalpieceinterview

 

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP, very similar to the experiment regarding the inclusion of ambient audio seen above, was the inclusion of the section of the interview that I had with my Dad where we discussed our memories in association to the particular landscape depicted. Similar to the use of accompanying text, I wanted to experiment with the inclusion of this particular aspect in order to see if it enhanced the viewer’s contextualized understanding of the project. (As you will see from the video included above, varying from the ambient audio experiment, this therefore meant that the interview audio accompanied a diptych that simply included the physical object and the landscape photograph, rather than a triptych with the text, as the interview essentially discussed what was in the text panel).

However, when listening to the section of the interview alongside viewing the image and the object, I noticed that, as suggested above, it was essentially doing the same job as the accompanying text (providing the viewer with a contextualized understanding) but it was taking away from my personal connection with the project through the inclusion of my Dad’s opinions as well as providing a more documentarian description, once again taking away from the conceptuality of the project (which will actually be enhanced through the creation of text that supplies the viewer with the same information in a more creative way). Similar to the ambient audio experiment, I also found that the inclusion of this audio could be appear to be overwhelming for the viewer as it provided them with too much information.

I have therefore decided not to use this particular presentation option as the display of my FMP.

 


 

Colours of the Frame:

White Frame:

 

Black Frame:

 

Oak Lookalike Frame:

 

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP, in relation to mounting methods, was the use of different frames. I wanted to experiment with the framing of my exhibition piece as I know (from previous photographic experience) that frames often enhance the permanence of the piece (which can be used to suggest the idea that I will constantly be connected to my Grandpa through the recollection of the memories I have achieved throughout the project), whilst also representing the personal ideology of wanting to share my stories and memories (through the professional openness of the framing display in an exhibition).

Within this particular experiment, however, as I didn’t actually own any frames, I simply made a paper representation of different coloured frames and tried to use my previsualisation skills to imaging what the final frame would actually look like. I also needed to take into account that I would need to mount the physical objects within a box frame that is no larger than 7.5-8cm wide (however, this is based on the widest physical object which is approximately 6cm in width, and I may be able to use smaller box frames if I use different objects).

Moving on to the colour of the frames that I experimented with, as you can see from the images that I included above, I decided to experiment with a white, black, and oak coloured “frame”. Starting with the white coloured “frame” and window mount, I decided that, although it was a stereotypical colour to use within exhibitions, it didn’t really work well with the softness of my photo as it appeared to pure and pristine, taking away from the natural rawness of the landscape depicted. Moving onto the black “frame” and white window mount, I decided that, once again, although it was a stereotypical colour to use within exhibitions, it greatly distracted away from my image as the darkness of the colour was in stark contrast with the softness of my photograph. I then, however, decided to experiment with and oak lookalike “frame” and white mount and personally thought that this particular combination worked really well with my images. This is because the white mount used within the frame enhances the darkened area of the photographs, creating a slight contrast within the image without taking away from it’s softness, and the wood aspect of the frame could be used to enhance the natural colour of the landscape within the image, whilst also resonating with the environment within the photograph (as suggested in a one-to-one tutorial with Anthony Luvera – please see “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 13 (One-to-One Tutorial with Anthony Luvera)”)

After completing this particular mounting experiment, I currently think that I will want to use the wooden frame as the mounting technique for my final exhibition piece. However, the next stage that I will need to take after completing all of my experiments is to create Photoshop mock-ups of the chosen exhibition display to see whether each of the frames will be the same size, or if some of the aspects (for example, the object and the text) have smaller frames to enhance the fact that they’re smaller than the photo (whilst also increasing the photographs importance within the piece).

 


 

Masking Tape:

Masking Tape

 

The next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP, in relation to a more contemporary mounting method, was the use of masking tape that was suggested by Anthony Luvera in a one-to-one tutorial (please see the blog post “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 13 (One-to-One Tutorial with Anthony Luvera)”).

However, when conducting this particular experiment, I soon realized that I couldn’t see how the use of this contemporary technique would relate (let alone enhance) any of the concepts or themes explored throughout my project, so I have therefore decided not to use this particular presentation option in the display of my FMP.

 


 

Pins:

Pins

Very similar to the previous “Masking Tape” experiment, the next presentation option that I decided to experiment with for my FMP, in relation to a more contemporary mounting method, was the use of pins that was suggested by Anthony Luvera in a one-to-one tutorial (please see the blog post “352MC Professional Photographic Practice – Lecture 13 (One-to-One Tutorial with Anthony Luvera)”).

Once again, however, when conducting this particular experiment, I soon realized that I couldn’t see how the use of this contemporary technique would relate (let alone enhance) any of the concepts or themes explored throughout my project, so I have therefore decided not to use this particular presentation option in the display of my FMP.

 



 

AFTER-THOUGHTS AND REFLECTION (and a brief experiment regarding frame sizes):

After experimenting with each of these different presentation options, I have been able to pinpoint the display I wish to use for my FMP collection. As suggested above, the final presentation method I will be employing is the triptych with a collected object, landscape photo, and text because I thought that the incorporation of an object (rather than a still-life image) enhanced the piece by creating an interesting installation to engage the viewers attention, whilst also acting as an immersive reference to the landscape within the photo. I also thought that the inclusion of the object, also symbolized the documentarian, topographic survey of the landscape that I underwent throughout the project (through it’s reference to an archival piece), as well as the physical revisiting of the places, thus enhancing the representation of my methodology within the piece (which is a major part of the projects concept). The inclusion of the object in comparison to the landscape photograph and the text, therefore created a balanced exhibition piece which engaged and immersed the viewer, whilst also providing them with enough information to gain a contextualized understanding behind both the projects concept and methodology, thus increasing their accessibility.

Now, in relation to the frames, as suggested above, I personally preferred the look of the wooden frame and white mount because the white mount enhances the darkened area of the photographs, creating a slight contrast within the image without taking away from it’s softness, and the wood aspect of the frame could be used to enhance the natural colour of the landscape within the image, whilst also resonating with the environment within the photograph. However, as suggested above, after I had chosen my final exhibition presentation, I then said that I needed to create Photoshop mock-ups to see whether each of the frames will be the same size, or if some of the aspects (for example, the object and the text) have smaller frames to enhance the fact that they’re smaller than the photo (whilst also increasing the photographs importance within the piece).

As you can see from the photographs included above, I therefore decided to conduct a brief experiment into the sizing of the frames where, as suggested, I created different Photoshop mock-ups. Now, looking at these two images, I personally feel that the frames which are the same size create a more aesthetically pleasing piece through the fact that it creates a consistency and a balance throughout the triptych, thus enhancing the relationship between the three different aspects (the object, the photo and the text). As you can see, however, as suggested in an earlier experiment, I have kept the object and text within the frame smaller than the landscape photograph. This is so that the photograph appears to be the slightly more important aspect of the piece (without overshadowing the other aspects which is controlled through the use of same size frames), and the object and the text can be seen as accompanying aspects that are there to be used for the contextualization of the photograph.

After deciding on my final presentation option and the framing I wish to create (apart from the fact that I obviously need to write the accompanying text for each of my collections pieces), the next stage that I need to undergo is for me to talk to Jon Legge (our technician) to research into how to mount the physical objects within the frames, whilst also finding a frame shop that can create custom frames to my specific requirements.

Advertisements