Assignment 5: Discerning decisions on my assignment 5

Based on my tutor’s feedback on my assignment work I understand that I had to be stronger to ‘demonstrate a considered reasoning of the visual path that leads towards a specific outcome’  and not to get stuck eventually in ideas.

Therefore I did review my assignment works and pre works with scrutiny and to ensure that I can build on the more successful ones and eliminate the others in my way forward.

The key questions I tried to answer with my works are:

  1. Does the work conveys a sense of site experience?
  2. Does the work convey reflect on my sensational experiences (tactile, auditory, visual)?
  3. Did I incorporate and processed a strong bodily awareness?
  4. Did I capture a believable meaning of time?
  5. Does the work convey a believable meaning?
  6. Does the composition, scale, format deliver on above questions?
  7. Are my mark marking and exploration of space coherent with my subject=
  8. Would the viewer get a sense of my site experience?

Reviewing:

Stefan513593 - Assignment 5 - review

Stefan513593 – Assignment 5 – review

Answers

  1. Does the work conveys a sense of site experience?
    => Partly in the pieces #9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17
    => Piece #10 did incorporate found materials from site (more intimate approach)
  2. Does the work convey reflect on my sensational experiences (tactile, auditory, visual)?
    => Partly  in the pieces #11, 12, 14, 16, 17. Here I incorporate especially the tactile, auditory sense while listening to my recordings.  
    => My ideas of overlaying sensational experiences through tissue etc. is not resolved. In pieces #10, 12 – 15 I used it rather illustrative, not quite coherent. In piece # 12 I used collage rather flat and not coherent and intrinsically. In pieces #13 I used de-collage to illustrate disruption of sensational experience ( too illustrative).
  3. Did I incorporate and processed a strong bodily awareness?
    => Partly in the pieces #11, 12, 16, 17. I find that by listening to my video-audio recording I could re-calle some sensations experienced on site.  Through the auditory character of the recording I was influenced as well by direct listening. But I think that most of all the larger scale work #17 is most successful as it did required my full body engagement while drawing (left and right and force) as I experienced on site)
  4. Did I capture a believable meaning of time?
    => After a while I wanted to include time. On the one and slow moving geological time passing, capturing the time moment in the moment of drawing – an idea of standing still, taking a rest to pause and mediate. I think that my horizontal markings (#2, 3, 7, 14, 14, 16, 17) do indicate a sense of  movement (like water)
  5. Does the work convey a believable meaning?
    => I believe that #11 and 17 are most successful in conveying a meaning towards my subject.
  6. Does the composition, scale, format deliver on above questions?
    => Compositions are at times too artificial and not capturing completely the meaning of one piece (see #12, 13, 15), not very clear what the empty space would mean. Although I wanted to incorporate void as a compositional element (#14 showing how landscape merges with the void)  I have to reconsider in how to make it more successful.
    => I worked in piece #17 on a wider format that embraces more site and time. I would see this more successful.
    => Larger scale foes embrace more of my full body engagement
  7. Are my mark marking and exploration of space coherent with my subject?
    => I applied rough or soft surface textures for my tactile experience (#11-17), I applied horizontal strokes for indication movement (water, #9, 14, 16, 17) and I used sharp and soft edges to indicate visual depth and forms. Pieces #11, 13, 15 do have a more intimate approach to the physicality of the my subject.
    => In pieces #10 and 13 there is an element of chance (irregular found materials on paper, drip markings) that I didn’t investigated further but that might be of further interest for my project.
  8. Would the viewer get a sense of my site experience?
    => I believe that the viewer would get most of my site experience from #11, 14, 15, 16, 17 as they do show some sense of site/pebble structure, movement, and space.
  9. I used my narrative pieces (#1-8) rather too sketch my reflection process. They do make some sense but I would not consider them as successful related to my project scope (single elements, at times more a technical or illustrative demonstration).

 Conclusion

  • Overall I think that pieces #11, 16, and 17 are the most successful ones. With #17 still the most bodily engaging work (larger scale). However it needs more and fuller engagement with the surface and some markings.
  • I need to consider how to incorporate time, time-elapse, and moment in other ways (less illustrative, more descriptive).
  • More investigation of physicality of subject and incorporation of found materials
  • Process: As my subject is a time-elapse approach (site walking with in parallel sensation experience, disruption of recordings, studio work from recordings, refection while and after drawing through recording myself) I think that I could elaborate more process as a drawing element.
  • Chance: Further exploration of chance, linking this to what I find and what I experience on site.
  • Void as a compositional element needs more attention and reflection.
  • Working large scale to incorporate my full body engagement while drawing is more successful for my project.
  • Format: Standard sizes (3:4 or 2:3 etc) are possibly not the most convincing

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: