I have now received formative feedback from Garry, my tutor. Full document here. Edited feedback and responses below. Garry’s notes in blue, my responses in black.
Very well presented work on the unseen Roadside Memorials (and inclusion of prints is a plus). Responded well to the ‘unseen’ effect and context of public remembering and private ‘memorials’. A subject that has been done before in the aftermath theme by many others (Simon Norfolk, Richard Misrach, Joel Sternfeld and as you highlight Paul Seawright ) but you approached in a more constructed way.
Thank you. I was aware of the Paul Seawright and Richard Misrach works, and I know of other work by Joel Sternfeld – worth researching further. I suppose I ‘do’ constructed work; it is part of my science/engineering background and Garry has made similar comments before.
Your inclusion of text and the subtle ways text and image can interact and play off each other is well formed. Particularly noteworthy is the presentation: prints on a kind of parchment type paper which (whether intentionally or not) has associations of an archival document – presented in a presentation box for viewing. This has all the hallmarks of a classifying system and you should delve deeper into this idea – from the nineteenth century onwards which creates a tension between the personal and familial memories of the loved ones left behind as memorial and the larger ‘collective memory’ of public reminders of tragedy viewed by anonymous mourners.
Interesting. I made a point of using a matt ‘art paper’ (Permajet Portrait White) because that seems to be what is expected (and I like the finish) but the ‘presentation box’ is actually just an A4 paper box, which I used to protect the prints for posting. I will take this as a cue and, at assessment time, I will make up either a box or a folder cover.
I’m not sure about ‘classifying’ but I can understand that producing a dedicated container give the impression of a ‘set’ in a way that a bunch of loose prints doesn’t. Is this the appeal of the family photograph album, compared with the shoebox full of Boots envelopes?
Text is well expressed but could do with some defining of terms earlier on, centred around aftermath and memory themes. Don’t presume you are talking to the same knowledgable viewer so signal your intent, as well as a more visual ‘showing what you are showing’ in regards particularly in regard to the contact prints. Show the process of decision making visually and reflect on it in the blog / leaning log.
Hmmm… maybe a bit of inconsistency within OCA here. My target audience is knowledgeable (tutor and assessors) so I did not feel the need to define terms that have been presented to me in the course materials. If writing or presenting to a different audience (for instance, if describing an OCA course to camera club members) I would use different language and start from a lower level of presumed knowledge.
“Show your working” is something that Garry has fed back before, and something that I must try harder to do.
Feedback on assignment and supporting work
Demonstration of technical and Visual Skills, Quality of Outcome, Demonstration of Creativity
• Introduce this notion of ‘unseen’ as being central to questioning one of the basic tenets of photography (its ‘indexicality’) and the difference between objective documentary ‘realism’ and how artists using photography might ‘express’ themselves. How do we photograph things that are essentially invisible (like feelings, memory etc).
Noted for the assessment rework. There will be an introductory paragraph.
• Would be useful to summarise your ‘examples of the unseen’ with the theme and approach that they use – for example your comments on ‘snapshot aesthetic’ of senses. You could apply the same method of description to empty buildings (aftermath theme) and roadside memories (personal / collective memory and aftermath theme)
Noted for the assessment rework. My first blog posting was an attempt at classification, although subsequent postings and the printed assignment notes became simply a list of ideas. Worth grouping and classifying again.
Technical and visual
Well executed. Excellent print quality (love the matt document effect). You could consider perhaps:
• was that time of day appropriate (direction of sun falling on flowers and given depth of field to the scene – a preliminary recce with an iPhone is good idea for this as is using web sites such as weather underground or apps such as photographers’ ephemeris to plan ahead (see – Readings)
OK, I confess. I only made one visit to each site, and dealt with whatever conditions I found there. I was uncomfortable about being there at all and wanted to get ‘in and out’ without being challenged. I then relied on software to produce useable images.
I know and have used The Photographers’ Ephemeris before, usually on holiday when planning a revisit to a scene.
Shutter speed. A personal preference but don’t pictures taken at a fairly high shutter speed of passing cars make them look like they are parked? Perhaps a little blur – experimenting with shutter from 8th to 60th to see the extent would have been stronger. It would also imply the ‘compassion fatigue’ of general public as cars pass by the memorial of a tragedy that is once removed from their own lives.
Looking back at the EXIF data, I see that all images were taken in aperture-priority automatic on a compact (Canon G-1X) with a smallish sensor. Shutter speeds were between 1/60 and 1/800. This is my ‘snapshot default’ setting and it may be that the images would have benefitted from something more considered.
Depth of Field/focus
As last assignment feedback: outline your process here and in the blog. Could you do some tests and include them?
• This kind of work probably needs maximum depth of field on most of them (Christopher Wakeman, Stuart Wikens, Philip Baker, Lenne sad Marie, Jane Hobbs, Leane Culver) less so for Mark Whalley (which is kind of abstracted) and Osvaldas Mimsa (where you show the attention to the written scrawls on the post).
My inclination is in the other direction. The photograph used in my blog posting introducing the idea has a very shallow depth of field, and isolates the memorial from the surrounding scene and traffic that way.
• Of course you can adopt a variety of approaches and understand that some of these you are drawing attention to the flowers as memorials but they can be done by making the viewer work and slowing down the viewer’s gaze (which maximum d.o.f does – as the viewer tends to consider the whole internal context of the image rather than being led by the imposition of the photographer. This is the difference between gaze and glance and the strategies employed – in differing ways by Frank and Evans (see Papageorge in – assignment 1 – Readings)
Hmmm…. I quite like leading the viewer’s gaze (which I do using contrast and exposure tricks in this set). Is this a ‘camera club influence’ that needs exorcising? Certainly, it is a dominant theme of camera club judges’ comments. “Gaze versus glance” is a topic for a future blog posting.
Justify your approach. So for example “Many were taken in harsh sunshine” say why. Forensic Gaze? As you could have chosen a different time of day to firstly avoid post production as well as link with the ‘metaphor’. This is why recce first shoot research and notation on contacts is a good move for this kind of work (its not an ‘event’ that you can’t come back to the following day and revise.
Valid point. Personal discomfort/unease triumphing over due consideration.
The contact sheet again lacks notation. Difficult to do I understand. You have shown in some sense a variety of approaches (IMG_8653) as a contextual view then (IMG-8654) as a more ‘illustrative’ strait document. This conceptual thinking is proving useful, although the main body of exploration presents alternatives of essentially the same composition and visual stance. Could have in this process (as I think response in the blog by peers suggests) offered yourself alternative visual stances (such as the views of memorials you have decided on and a more front facing ‘forensic’ view whilst you are on the same location. I think your response works (you justify it) but seem to have made those decisions a priori before exploring them with your camera. At this stage use the idea of contact prints as a visual recce (which may include having to re-shoot one you have mulled over the edit). Its leaning the visual approaches and documenting them through process.
In my film/darkroom days, I did use contact sheets a lot more, and marked them up with ‘select’ and rough crops. However, that is not the way that I work in digital; I make decisions based on on-screen grids of images (grid views in Lightroom and Bridge) which are the electronic, and ephemeral, analogues of contact sheets. Producing marked-up printouts seems artificial; not so much “show your working” as “construct a post-hoc version of your working”.
‘Exploring with the camera’ is pretty much standard practice (it is embarrassing to see the image count sometimes) but I do like to do some editing before pressing the button (Garry’s ‘a priori decisions’)
Learning Logs or Blogs/Critical essays
Well written proposal on memorials, metaphor and ‘the nature of remembrance and its tokens’
• When describing this work in text do define key terms (such as Anchorage and Relay) briefly. I understand its a response to the course material but see the write up or ‘statement of intent’ that you would send to an editor or curator as separate document where key theoretical terms should be defined first.
I’m probably influenced here by the EYV course notes, which set maximum word-counts, therefore requiring some economy in writing. If I am assuming a more ‘lay’ reader than hitherto, and if there is no strict word limit (apart from a personal preference not to be prolix) then I will define key terms.
• The ‘open’ text is strong as it leave the viewer to make interpretations without illustration. As you say in the blog: “The viewer is an integral part of the subject/ photographer/image/viewer sequence and will extract his/her own meaning from the image”
• As above, the blog needs a little reworking to show the summary of your research. Such ‘insights’ as your re-addressing of Terry Barrett could possibly be summarised at the top (or in a separate ‘learning log’ menu. In other words use the blog as a ‘repository’ off found material research and responses to eh exercises then summarise. This means reviewing what you have found and making judgments on it which are used to ‘inspire’ or contextualise your practice work. That’s reflective leaning. Many students see ‘research’ as simply collating information without the analysis. Its on it sway but could do with ‘signalling’ so that assessors can quickly see your ‘journey’.
I assume this means short-form write-ups under the ‘Research & Reflection’ menu heading, possibly sub-dividing the ‘Other notes’ sub-heading.
Valid suggestion. I tend to read something, say “OK, that was interesting” and then move on. A bit of retrospection would be valuable.
• Peer review in OCA forums is good. Take what you need from this but of course use your own judgment and justify your approach (which you have done). I agree that a front facing ‘forensic’ gas might have been useful. Do not however negate the approach you have taken. Try both and make judgements in the contact editing stage with a view to revising and updating. This kind of work should be re-visited as you progress.
My standard approach to feedback, whether peer review, camera club judge or tutor, is to spend a bit of time with it, try out the suggestions, then make my own decisions.
Edited out of this posting, but added to my reading list.
Pointers for the next assignment
• Make more of the developmental and critical choices you make when working with a ‘contact sheet’ study examples (above). Make the contact sheet show the process of decision making and mark making from the different viewpoints
Artificial, but I will try.
Critical analysis of images (as above).
Important. I do try it with individual images in blog postings, but I need to do it more.