This week we were invited to upload a video of 10 minutes duration focussing on our work in the context of that of past and current photographers with links to the wider art world and other approaches and considerations such as philosophy and ethics. I had been building up to this exercise with some trepidation. It was an opportunity to give some time to the preparation of the Critical Review assignment due in on 30th April and to gain feedback from colleagues on the course as to the value of the piece as a draft for the written critical review. I knew it was not going to be an assessed piece and that apparently only those who submitted themselves could comment on the films of others. In the end I decided to complete the task although apprehensive about my slow internet upload speed (it took 3 days before the previous film was successfully uploaded!).
I used the draft of the critical review I had been working on which was still very rough but at least it was a start. Using Camtasia again I soon found out that my written voice is not the spoken voice needed for film! Several re scripts later I had the narrative and had started to have images and text slides in mind to accompany it. First attempt was over 14 minutes …oops! The final version was still just over 11.5 minutes but I was running out of time knowing that uploading could take days so decided that was it. I chose to only use my images despite referring to the work of others. Assuming that the Critical Review would be text only which I have now found out is not true (I am glad I realised from comments received on the film and then checked with staff). I usually put a reference list at the end of my films but as this was not an assessed piece and the film was already long decided not to. Thankfully uploading went smoothly although it took about 10 hours.
Despite the pressure of completing a task when assessed pieces needed attending to I am glad I managed to submit. It has been a great opportunity to learn about the work of others and how they have approached a reflective critical review. The exchanges we have had about each others project work as well as film content and presentation have been constructive, insightful, informative, supportive and helpful in thinking about the final critical review. I summarised the points made in relation to my film for discussion in the webinar where I received additional comments from the tutor and colleagues.
Re my photographs
Helicopter view of found items interesting
Add people as signifiers to the signs (i.e. rubbish)
Aesthetic or content focus or both?
Beautifully composed images
Conflict of my practice and my views on reality versus staged imagery
Show examples of the work of others
Do not use the title Re-Cycle for my second collection
Market locally near beaches
Market to commercial enterprises associated with waste management
Re my film as a precursor to my written critical review
Compliments received: research and linking topics of module to my work, systematic presentation of motivation, influences and progress
Suggestions made: needs more critical depth and lateral references, explain the work of those referenced (e.g. Squires and Burtynsky), contextualise, investigate still life and surrealism, consider how digital has facilitated manipulation more than analogue.
Overall I was pleased with the reception of my film despite my omissions and running over time. The comments are all being digested (I agree with the majority of points made) and hopefully the final written and illustrated piece will address these. Now to cut it down from 4,500 words to 2,500 to comply with the assignment criteria.