I don't plan to make this the official new format for the blog—going sans photo, but my limitations create some restrictions and I will settle for this again today.
Last week, I made fun of my "90% new work" rule and after some comments on that rule I thought I should clarify and ask the opinion of others as to what qualifies as new work.
Common sense and self-preservation told me to simply show mostly pieces that exist in present inventory of framed prints and enjoy the experience of our venture. Over time, I have amassed a decent collection and I could easily have had enough pieces for such a small show as this. Need I reference previous examples of ignoring common sense in my plans of action?
Therefore, after a brief period of struggling to talk sense to myself, I surrendered and admitted that I was going to spend a small chunk of money on new framing kits as well as dig into the work of prepping new pieces. My definition of new work, this time around, meant work that may have been displayed on my blog, but pieces that had never been given the final tweaks. Web ready, yes. But, not print-ready. From past experience, I knew better than to assume that a piece that had played well on the web was ready to be printed and framed for presentation. Sure enough, there were cases where I got some unpleasant surprises and spent quite a bit of time coaxing out the file that was up to the rigors of print.
By the time I finished the job, I had six framed pieces that were new to my framed-prints collection. I had planned on hanging eight pieces which would fill my small portion of our limited display area. Right off you can see that I didn't meet my 90% goal. I got close, but three pieces that I had my heart set on eluded me. (Perhaps I should be grateful. After all, we have another show in December.)
More to come on another day. Meanwhile, does your definition of new (for a show) come closer to the SoFoBoMo rules—meaning photographs taken in the period immediately before a show? Does it exclude work previously shared in any form? Maybe I am out there in some alternative universe making stuff up as I go along. Wouldn't be the first time.
Anita
ReplyDeleteI never think of 'time' when it comes to shows just in themes. I work normally on projects so have a series of images that are loosely related to one another in most cases. This is how I plan for a show. For a serious show I have found it works better than a lot of images that seem to be all over the place, that and the gallery owners in most cases want the this type of show.
Ray - Thanks for adding your thoughts. This makes sense to me and jibes with everything I have ever heard. In my case, I didn't have a gallery owner to please—just myself; but, the reasoning makes sense. You might could stretch definitions and say I had a theme. After all, the show was predominately equine studies. Of course, that is true of most pieces I show.
ReplyDeleteRay - I forgot to add that I have tried to post at your site, in the recent past, and can never get my comment to post. I have no idea what I was doing wrong. Any thoughts?
ReplyDeleteI tend to go with work that has a common theme (either in subject matter or style, depending), but also try to have a reasonable collection of work that will be new to the intended audience of the show.
ReplyDeleteAnita which site? most of the short posts and non important photos are going to http://rlketcham.posterous.com/
ReplyDeleteThe rlketcham.com I am using for essays and the longer thoughts on art and photography. I spend most of my time and energy on the storytelling magazine site at http://rearcurtain.ca/ which I would love to have you contribute to sometime. Let me know where and I'll look into it.
JP — Thanks a lot for your comment. Since I stayed with the same style throughout and mostly a single subject for these two shows, it appears that I am aligned with your thinking. It does make sense to me that new work adds a bit of excitement to the venture. I also found that the idea of having a show (tiny and insignificant as it was) fired up my creativity—or at least productivity.
ReplyDeleteRay K—I will look that up today and I had no idea you had so many sites. If I still have trouble posting, I will be sure to let you know.
ReplyDeleteYou knocked my socks off with mentioning me as a possible contributor. Do you know something about me that I don't know?
Ray — The rlketcham.com site is the one that doesn't recognize my email address as a valid one. I understand now that you are putting your energy into the dynamite storytelling magazine site. Bravo!
ReplyDeleteNew for me, in the exhibition sense of the word, means work I have not previously exhibited. Doesn't matter when I created it, but generally it will have been in the last year.
ReplyDeleteMy work is also shown thematically. I have three themes for my exhibition work: B&W, color pictorialist, and abstracts.
Roberta—It is sounding very much like I am in the mainstream with my way of selecting pieces for an exhibit. I suppose that is a good thing. Since I am my own editor, that is interesting to me.
ReplyDeleteIn my case, there were pieces that came from photographs taken a while ago, but all the processing reflected my current way of seeing. Your three themes sounds like an excellent way of organizing your work. Thanks for the comment.
Oh Anita, there are so many definitions and rules in the World we rather should forget about most of them. You think to much, just go with the flow and continue have fun and follow your intuition, as you already seem to do. :-)
ReplyDeleteI know, I think too much, too, but that's another thing. :-)
ReplyDeleteOve—Your first comment brought a big smile. The second one produced a healthy laugh. I appreciate both comments from a fellow occasional over-thinker.
ReplyDeleteIn my defense, I never had any intention of changing the way I was handling things. Still, I get curious sometime as to whether the personal rules I am making up are standard, after all. It is interesting to me how often I think that I have devised a new way to handle something and it turns out to be mainstream thinking. Interesting how we can pick up more information than we realize.