Signal/Response.
Signal/Response (Washington, DC) – I am intrigued by museum/gallery layouts and how art is cased against white walls, other art present, and lighting. In other words, I want this photograph to inaccurately represent what the curators intended to be seen in the museum. Taken with one of my favorite cameras (yet frustratingly light-leaking and broken), the Rollei Magic II, on Kodak 400V film.
This photograph caught my attention however I disagree with what you assume is the curators intention for this work. Perhaps you wish to say that you hope to portray art from a new perspective that the confines of a gallery space would otherwise limit?
Jenny
13 Jun 09 at 12:46.am
@Jenny – Yes, you put it much better than I have. I do not have a background in curating, but my assumption is that art is placed within a museum to accurately represent the work to the public audience. Great pains are taken to place, light, and maintain the work so that every person has the same environment to view and digest the work.
So where does an image that has a new perspective on existing art belong? Could it stand on its own in a gallery environment? Does this photograph need to give reference or a credit line to the sculpture it represents partially?
In the end, any photograph of another piece of art (or nature or person) would not exist without the subject being existing in the first place. So maybe by this fact, a photograph does owe its existence to its subject?
I am definitely intrigued by your point, so feel free to elaborate. And I ask these questions about photography because I feel that where that where there are no solid answers makes for interesting subjects.
Abram
27 Jun 09 at 12:47.am