Thursday, January 25, 2007
ceramics
Two ceramic figures by a local artist called Ann Goodfellow. They were on display in the King St Gallery in Carmarthen. She kindly gave me permission to use the photo for showing. An amount of cross-processing and a deliberate move away from some of the finer points of toning.
Permalink / posted by and copyright of John Ellis : 11:44 AM
Comments:
My first reaction was that this didn't look like a John Ellis photo. Nothing wrong with that of course, but you know, prejudices need to be fed.
The way that the figure on the left stands out make the whole image look like a composite, but I gather from the description that it isn't (although only by implication). I'm left wondering what I'm looking at, but in a show me more sort of way.
Overall, to me, a disturbing image. Are these people? What has happened to them?
No, not a composite but two black and white ceramic figures standing on a small plinth. Each figure is around 4' 3". The particular attraction this day was the picture in the centre background (mutilated by the processing), the two windows and the horse head sculpture. A case of that end of the gallery (first floor) being more than the sum of its parts - photographically. Another view is at the link:
http://www.johnelliseone.co.uk/gallery/photo.php?photo=745&exhibition=52&u=1178|9|...
John,
I think that your 'stills' version uses space more effectively than the alternate that you've linked. Also holding the green in the, whatever it is, on the wall makes for an anchor that the other shot seems to lack.
Colin - you are in good company. My wife reached that conclusion and hence the fact that this one went to Stills. I hanker after the other one because I like the floor!
Hmm, I like the other better. The floor is worth keeping, but the background is little busy.
The overall look and style of these shots is intriguing. I'm not usually a fan of the cross processed look, but it seems to suit this subject.
..me too. The linked photo is much stronger than the Stills version. The Stills version looks a little muddled with the focus melding in to the background too easily and giving it a flat appearance.
i.e. In the Stills it looks as if the right hand sculpture is reaching out with a withered hand and the back of the head dissolving in to the background picture.
Though my mind knows I'm looking at a flat 3D scene nothing pops out at me. The foreground sculpture is looking floorwards the righthand one looking out of the picture to the right. Given the processed nature of the picture I have no easy point of recollection in which to fix these stares with even though the photo does not show me.
This is less pronounced in the linked picture as both the top right painting and window I can clearly make out. The further away sculpture has a point of reference for its stare and I'm a happy viewer.
If none of this makes sense let me know and I'll give it another go at explanation!
When I put it to my wife that she hd two dissenters, she admitted that it was all a question of the impact of seeing whichever one first time - and she saw the Stills version first.
I understand what you say Akikana and you don't need to have another go! I think that what I was trying to get was largely what Colin puts in his last three (short) sentences. Having given the sculptor, Ann Goodfellow, an A4 print of each she has just replied with: "...I thought the images were very interesting, and reflected the ideas underpinning the work...".
I'm glad that the cross-processing largely works for everybody: the original shots were fine but somehow the picture cried out for the other artworks to be dissolved somewhat to add atmosphere rather than detail.
I prefer the balance in the composition of this image, perhaps I am a bit conventional (?).
The treatment seems to work with the ceramic sculpture although the right hand figure gets a bit lost in the background; the left figure is the one with the power.
I also like the pensive feel of the main sculpture, is there a feeling of rejection by the right-hand sculpture? The more I look at this the more the interaction between the two intrigues me.
Apocalyptic suburbia. The petrified remains of the couple in their kitchen/diner freezes the moment when the horror fell from the skies…..
Now, let’s discuss narrative gaps.
An emotive image John.
Post a Comment
The way that the figure on the left stands out make the whole image look like a composite, but I gather from the description that it isn't (although only by implication). I'm left wondering what I'm looking at, but in a show me more sort of way.
Overall, to me, a disturbing image. Are these people? What has happened to them?
http://www.johnelliseone.co.uk/gallery/photo.php?photo=745&exhibition=52&u=1178|9|...
I think that your 'stills' version uses space more effectively than the alternate that you've linked. Also holding the green in the, whatever it is, on the wall makes for an anchor that the other shot seems to lack.
The overall look and style of these shots is intriguing. I'm not usually a fan of the cross processed look, but it seems to suit this subject.
i.e. In the Stills it looks as if the right hand sculpture is reaching out with a withered hand and the back of the head dissolving in to the background picture.
Though my mind knows I'm looking at a flat 3D scene nothing pops out at me. The foreground sculpture is looking floorwards the righthand one looking out of the picture to the right. Given the processed nature of the picture I have no easy point of recollection in which to fix these stares with even though the photo does not show me.
This is less pronounced in the linked picture as both the top right painting and window I can clearly make out. The further away sculpture has a point of reference for its stare and I'm a happy viewer.
If none of this makes sense let me know and I'll give it another go at explanation!
I understand what you say Akikana and you don't need to have another go! I think that what I was trying to get was largely what Colin puts in his last three (short) sentences. Having given the sculptor, Ann Goodfellow, an A4 print of each she has just replied with: "...I thought the images were very interesting, and reflected the ideas underpinning the work...".
I'm glad that the cross-processing largely works for everybody: the original shots were fine but somehow the picture cried out for the other artworks to be dissolved somewhat to add atmosphere rather than detail.
The treatment seems to work with the ceramic sculpture although the right hand figure gets a bit lost in the background; the left figure is the one with the power.
I also like the pensive feel of the main sculpture, is there a feeling of rejection by the right-hand sculpture? The more I look at this the more the interaction between the two intrigues me.
Now, let’s discuss narrative gaps.
An emotive image John.