The BIG change
Whilst looking at the initial space I would be working with within the gallery I saw the project being able to take a more of an interactive route. With the gallery walls having no restraints to how close the public to get to the images and the wall space large enough to look at more creative display outcomes for the work. This however turned out to be far from what I will actually be able to achieve. Due to regulations within the gallery on what materials are able to be displayed for health and safety reasons. I would be unable to display work printed on my hand made papers, this is mainly down to the use of recycled bee hives and because the gallery is located within the café area of the museum.
I will therefore be looking to display my work printed on a premium A3 heavy weight matt paper. The work will consist of up between 12/15 images depending on visual aesthetic when placed in the gallery space.
I will be framing them in a traditional gallery style this is due to the new format of the images I think it best suits not only the space but the ethos of the gallery. The gallery has been more involved with the display of my final images than first thought. They have been very specific ideas of what can and can’t be shown within their gallery space. This has allowed me to look back on previous work and see a collaborative outcome that can be created from work spanning the duration of the course. I initially looked at how my new images would work with each individual project within the main body of work and have conceived how they wold best, artistically and aesthetically fit in with the new images.
After a lot of thought and visual layouts of all work I decided to look at my first hand in Mellifera Neonicotinoid, when the work was initially presented I felt even though the visual dynamics of the work were clearly visible the message could get lost without any written interaction from myself. I have from the start of the project allowed my work to explore its own identify and though directed by science and facts allowed my work to find its own meaning in the ambiguity of the knowledgeable mind, by this I refer to the audience viewing the images. The more informed they are on the subject matter the more the images can direct their train of thought to provoke meaning and extra interact in the subject matter, but allowing the audience members who are not informed on the environmental science behind my work to still find viewing the images enjoyable and emotive. But as the project developed I felt myself being drawn away from the initial message which was to inform people on the downsides of using the pesticides and I feel I became relaxed in this paradox I had created between the informative and the artistic, as I found mixing the both and allowing them to still have ambiguous meaning but that I could direct to be something I wasn’t able to do.
I have found my mixing this body of work with well selected images from my new material, this idea of the images not allowing enough directed stimulus can be lifted. By allowing my images to regain a small amount of control by the text chosen in the new images I can clearly display what the project was mean to be, that was a creative interaction between my scientific mind and my creative mind. The two have always informed each other but from this change in my outcome which was totally unexpected and wouldn’t have happened without the constraints put upon me from the gallery I have no pieced together a project that allows these two parts of my mind to collaborate and form a body of work that not only informs but that can fully show my message of the destruction that is hidden in the beauty of the spoken word.