Gallery Visit. (DT WK 7)

I really loved the gallery visit. Seeing all those works up where the pubic can see, it gives me chills and if I ever have my work up next to the likes of Mark Adams it'll be an amazing day. Seeing such beautiful photographs, put together in such a way that they were all linked even if they had such different subject matter was astounding. Being able to see all of that really put into perspective the way in which some photographs should be presented. I understand a little better the differences in presentation and how they can alter the portrayal of the photograph.

Questions:

1) Does the look of these works differ to each other in terms of sharpness and grain, and if so, do these differences affect the viewing of these works?
- They all differ in sharpness and resolution, some, such as Mark Adams work is much sharper than that of Akura Makea-Pardington. But this is not a drawback for the works, Akura's work for example suits having a softer resolution, especially with some of the story behind it. The softness of some of the works, works well for them, just as the sharpness works for others.

2) Choose a work and analyse it in terms of compositional techniques and the ideas you think the photographer is working with:
- I chose Mark Adams work Savaii, Samoa 2008. Compositionally, the structure in the work is the main focus, with the forest around encroaching in on the building. The walls of the image are very straight within the frame, as if he's standing inside the building and lined up the edges of the frame with the walls of the structure. There is a contrast between light and dark in the upper and lower frame, the forest around providing this vibrant green, trying to overcome this dark hardened lava floor. The remains of human life are once again becoming one with the earth and I think that's astounding, it's as if the forest is trying to heal the destruction caused by natural forces. The whole image is hauntingly beautiful and I'm not sure, but I think that's what the photographer was going for.

3) Comment on the framing, size and presentation. How does the framing and presentation change your perception of the work compared to when you saw it on your computer screen?
- The computer screen really didn't do the image justice. With the size of the work, you can see all the little details in the cracks and the writing on the walls of the structure. The frame works well for the image, the black frame ties with the darkness of the image itself. I think a white frame would've detracted from the image as it would've stood out a lot more, but the black frame almost molds with the image. The only problem I  had was the glass, because of the reflective surface, it was hard to see detail in the darker areas.

4) Is there anything you would do differently in the presentation of this photograph?
- I think using a different glass would've worked better for this image, the glass distracts the viewer because it's reflective, but the frame works well with it. So, cost wise, a black canvas probably would have done well for this image. I am conscious that the curator wanted to protect the image from the elements and every day life, so a frame was probably necessary. It's a bit of a balancing act.