images from recent work in show, after the show comes down.
Having returned to the show after the hiatus of the opening I was less dissatisfied with the work, time and distance is so important and impossible to hurry. An interesting experiment, several technical things might have been preferred, to increase the exactness of size and colour, which would make it a more seemless image. The colour does seem to match well at the bottom of the image, it is the light which alters the tone so much and which the light in the space should line up with the image at certain times – thus the image would merge to a greater extent with its surroundings for parts of the day.
Looking back at original images taken of the wardrobe I prefer these as images to the ones posted here. However, for the show the work as an image was more successful than exhibiting the wardrobe as an object. This raises questions about the use of photographs and what the work is, the documentation of the work being less interesting than the documentation of the making of the work. The work (as a photographic image) itself also holds my attention as an image which could be placed elsewhere. Thus it is site specific but could have life beyond that site as well. Standing in the printers it offered a convincing image of an object, even though the background of the wall it leant against was a painted white wall, proving the image to be convincing as an object (ie a wardrobe as a physical presence not just as a photographic print!).