Like many of us I have day-job; part time in a gallery. Its interesting and useful on many levels but it does keep me out of the studio, and my head is full of ideas of new ways to say things and new things to say. I’m on the verge of re-photographing some still-life/found objects from different angles and in different lights. As I have been working with and manipulating my earlier images I can see ways to move and impove the final pieces. Can’t wait for time in the studio.
“Are all images not drawn”? David Minton. I do not believe that the discrete definitions of the forms of art production have become interchangable. Mostly I believe that the discrete defintitions have meaning because they are useful.
I have been reading this winter’s issue (143) of Frieze magazine which is focused on still-life photography. I was particularly struck by the article by Chris Wiley “Depth of Focus” which looks at some current US photo artists and their manipulations and play at the edges of these definitions.
My own work often skips around and across these boundaries and I am working on a series of images which combine quite tradtional still life painting with photgraphic companion images. So far, I am clear in my own mind how these two parts speak to each other, but less clear about how to display them so that they best convey that conversation.
I am currently drawing onto prints of already manipulated photographs. I wonder how much the process of manipulating photographic images can be considered a form of drawing? There is a juried show of drawing in the offing and I am aware that regardless of my feelings on the subject all art is open to the interpretation of the viewer and judge.
