Wk 12 - Critique feedback

Am feeling pretty positive about the critique. Much of the feedback was on issues I'd been worrying about already, so it was reassuring in a way to have those reflected by other people...

Feedback from various people (Lamatul, Hanna, Ziggy, Fern, Matt E)

- initially the images look very ambiguous; they sit between nature and the digital, which draws people in

- pace of video too slow, could be faster; not meeting "millennial brain" expectations or wants

- screen could've been much bigger - lots of detail in each piece but it's lost in the small screen; bigger screen would be better for immersion, which most people wanted in the critique (a limitation of what Whitecliffe has on hand in terms of equipment but would be worth sourcing high quality equipment elsewhere for future exhibitions)

- side by side screens may be more effective than a singular screen; multiple screens in one space with static images perhaps, rather than a singular moving series

- influences of looking at Mat Collishaw's Infectious Flowers comes through in the assemblage; links between blog posts and work visible, thought pattern and themes being dealt with contextualized well on the blog, however an artist statement would be important in future for people unfamiliar with it

- stirs up emotions of remembering or thinking back on something - i.e. the images reflect ideas of fragmenting or assemblage; this makes the nature component feel more like an inner memory-scape, idea or someone reflecting on nature in one's mind's eye rather than an accurate image

- looked like a glitched map initially; like a tree, but not a tree at the same time; landscape like, scale is ambiguous

- forms resemble mountains, hills, coral reefs; "rough diamond" feel, have to extract the meaning visually and conceptually; something natural but also processed

- the images are both digital and natural landscapes in themselves

- better to see faster paced moving image series if presenting in future, as this would allow better recollection and comparison of the images across the entire series and potentially a more obvious visual morphing from one into the other

- why not have subtle moving components within the images themselves instead of moving image series? Movement may enhance the natural element of the content (i.e. subtly growing, morphing)

- 'conditionality'? - how does expectation of media influence expectations? (i.e. wanting faster pace from a TV screen, anticipation of something going to happen, frustration if it doesn't

- if artist statement connects to responses, you kind of want them validated; is it a moment of peace? is it a facilitated moment?

- nature + tech - very different fields/concepts/etc. but treatment of the content brings them together in an effective way

- of the images, the highly illuminated 3D shapes give the forms more context; more of a realistic feel, something objectlike rather than flat and collaged; better sense of depth and nature

- would like to see in relation to other artworks in the space; if it was and if there was a relationship between titled (i.e. that acknowledged the pohutukawa, objects from garden, objects that are natural in an urban landscape, etc.), why not have other connections? (i.e. things from friends' gardens, other trees, etc.; what would tie them together?)

- look into Jae Hoon Lee's work

- consider photo-boxes for exhibition; talk to photo-media folks about ideas or for help

- If asking viewers to look, what do they get for their investment in the work?