University Campus Suffolk

As has been previously mentioned within this blog, my use of family photography throughout this project has meant that I have produced all of my prints in a 6×4 format to match that of the original image.

Whilst producing my prints in this scale is still an important element for me, I am beginning to think that I have perhaps confined myself to this scale too much. Through the projections of my etching plates I have been able to acknowledge the prominence of the mark-making upon the plate when the size is increased.

With this in mind I decided to print off a scaled up version of an original family photograph to try to decipher the effect this creates in relation to my smaller pieces.

At this scale the renounced quality reflects the lessened capability of photography in the early 90’s, although I am surprised it came out as well as it did. I am quite fond of the slight pixilation which is evident which I feel illustrates once more the blurriness of past memories.

As I think over the majority of work I have produced for this project, I am beginning to understand in more depth why I have produced my work in certain ways. In the attempt to not over think my work too much, I guess I have let it flow in many directions and only now am I fully comprehending the common thread.

I would say that my initial ideas were much more weighted in me wanting to remember the past and the little things that have made my life unique to any other.

Through the development of this project, however, I feel that my work has become much more about that loss of memory and the distance between the past and present. In my paintings, prints and even my projections, through each process the original image has been distorted more and more.

I guess through everything my trying to remember has become more an acknowledgement that remembering is not possible. After all if it weren’t for my family photographs I would not be representing these times in my life at all.

After conducting my experiment with projecting my etching plates, I started to think about other ways that I can use the plates in other areas of my project.

I have been largely preoccupied with my seaside etchings most recently and have I feel neglected the painting element of my project. To remedy this and continue experimenting, I have decided that it would be interesting to project an etching plate onto a canvas and create a painting from it.

I do not wish, however, to merely recreate the etching image on a larger scale but also to incorporate the anaglypta paper within a mixed media background.

The images within this post illustrate my current progress with this idea. I have so far created layers upon the canvas with anaglypta wallpaper and clear/white tissue paper. Both materials coexist in a textural manner upon the canvas, creating a background which, once painted on, I hope will demonstrate the same level of distortion and depth as can be found within my anaglypta etching prints.

Since completing my 22 series on both normal and anaglypta paper, I have rearranged how my prints were positioned on the wall of my studio space. By matching each pair of prints and placing them right next to each other, I feel I was better able to acknowledge the success of each print in comparison to the other.

It is clear when looking at my prints in this way that the anaglypta paper has played a large part in distorting the original image. I believe this effect works better with some images than others. There are pairings where both prints are as strong as each other, although in some cases it is the anaglypta element which creates a stronger outcome.

I believe overall that the anaglypta prints have greater depth and make for more interesting viewing. Not only do these pieces embody a material which relates back to my childhood, it is also unique to me as an artist in how I have used this material.

I think it is important for me now to properly display these anaglypta prints in photo frames in order to make a direct reference to photography. In a way this questions the format and purpose of photography itself.

Using prints which are distorted and not completely true to the event they illustrate, I think, reflects or even heightens the theory that what photographs tell us about real life is often inaccurate in the first place. It is interesting at this point to consider how my anaglypta prints relate more to how I remember my past than the original photograph from which my print is sourced.

After years of studying art I have come to the conclusion that my processes are often not quick ones! I definitely envy those that are able to produce high quality work in shorter amounts of time.

I suppose this can be thought about in a more positive way in how I have more time to consider what I am doing and why.

As I have been creating many etching plates from which to print from throughout my project, it seems a shame they cannot play a more central role in my overall outcomes. It was in conversation with a tutor when I realised this is exactly what I should do.

Just holding my plates up to the light creates an interesting and very different effect to that of my etching prints. In particular, it is the plates I have already printed which seem to have an added depth given the ink residue left after the printing process.

With this in mind I came up with the idea to use an overhead projector to project my etching plates onto a wall in the white space. The images shown within this post are examples of the effect this created.

To keep this idea in line with other parts of my project, I decided to attach anaglypta wallpaper onto the wall and then project the etching plate to see how the image would change. Unfortunately it was only if you were very close up to the wall that you could see the effect created by the anaglypta paper. This is a shame as it would’ve been nice to keep this thread within my work. I could experiment with painting on the anaglypta to see if this changed the outcome. I think the relationship between the wallpaper and projection would be really interesting although I would not want any colour to impede the original projection in any way.

When I began my etchings using my family photos, I was adamant that the format must remain 6×4 in relation to the size of the original photographs. Whilst I am happy that this is a common thread in my etching prints themselves, I must say it was really refreshing to see the image on a much larger scale when using the projector. I think at this size the viewer is better able to appreciate every single mark made on the etching plate. It is also interesting to acknowledge the contrast between more refined marks where I have stayed as true as possible to the photograph and the marks where the image becomes more abstract.

As already mentioned, the presence of the ink residue is heightened greatly through this projection process. This creates a completely different outcome to that of a print which is largely just black and white. This difference in colouration is unfortunately not something which is present with every etching plate, this is perhaps why I am drawn to certain plates where this is evident.

It was completely circumstantial that there was a plinth stood in front of the wall which I happened to be projecting onto. Instead of moving it out of the way I actually started to play around with extra items to see how the image could become almost three dimensional. I think this particular approach worked better with some etching plates than others but the overall effect I still did find engaging. I was mainly trying to move the plinth so that it was the figure which was brought forward out of the projection.

I think my next step would be to experiment not only with inked plates but also fresh etchings which have not yet been printed. These would be images from my seaside series which is still in progress. I would also like to play around with more plinths, perhaps covering the image up completely on the projector so that only the figure is visible upon the plinth as well.