Tuesday, March 31, 2009

264 final

hey all, this is my first installment of my 264 fiNAL.  i am exploring simple imagery while severely distressing the negatives: cutting up and reassembling, scratching, and burning.  i found out microwaves  can't destroy negatives, but negatives destroy microwaves...go figure.  anyway, this is the first somewhat finished negative and it is a shit as scan but regardless you should let me know what you all think. thanx

7 comments:

Jace said...

i meant ass! crappy scan

megan dunbar said...

jace, this looks nice. the cuts you did to integrate the two images are flawless. but i kinda wish the cuts were more jagged and not so clean. it's probably hard to do with film. something is bothering me about the tape but i'm not quite sure what, like theres not enough of it or theres too much. otherwise this one turned out great.

Leslie said...

Negatives are kind of made of silver...

Cam said...

yeah that would cause a microwave to die LOL

Ian Cavanaugh said...

i agree with megan, what is the point of cutting them if your just ganna put them back together perfectly also what happened to the rest of the neg, this is not a 4x5 format. why are you cropping if it about the destruction of a neg, i would thing you would want to show all of it. also look into other ways to rebuild the negs with maybe sinew or fishing line. besides that this is a great idea and i cant wait to see what it is actually about.

BrittanyNelson said...

I think the act of cutting them apart and putting them back to together "perfectly" has a lot of inherent value in the concept.
If the edges of the pieces are made more dramatic or given more space from each other I think it has the potential to become very distracting to the image.

Jace said...

thanx guys. to answer some questions it is 4x5 format and the size of this image is about 4x9 cause i put two 4x5 negs together and had to discard an inch or so combining them. i will consider the amount of tape comment but i disagree with the more raw combination of pieces. though i will probably explore that aspect i agree with britney that the "seamless" reassembly generates an intriguing depth. and as far as the conceptual binding for the project discussion we had earlier Ian, i have been thinking about it and i think that the concept behind the imagery is more so a reaction than anything else. this is very abbreviated but much of my imagery tends to veer away from "conventions" of photography and explores many taboos as to how to generate an image. not only do i personally enjoy the act of destruction but i feel that it is also an adversely creative process. i also feel that photographers are too concerned with the temporality of their imagery and making their mark on the field (myself included) , fueling the artistic ego, and this is my explorative response to that. being irrespective toward process and disregarding elements of permanence is intriguing and something i wish to pursue more. anyway ive written a book, enough blowing smoke up my own ass... i hope this has answered some questions.