For the first of my feedback session in Cheltenham, I had booked out a projection unit and some studio space in order to host a session where I would project my 40 images on a large surface and go through them with tutors and any other interested parties to get some feedback on the images, how they sit with each other, any details that may or may not need adjusting, and also just generally which images felt the most realised and fitting for the project.
Unfortunately, not many people were available for the session but I still planned to go ahead and instead treated the session as a 1 to1 with my personal tutor. Setting up the projector had been very kindly handled by one of the technicians and so all I needed to do was plug in my laptop and then adjust the setup as needed for scale.
In a very cold studio, we began the session, and to begin with I just went through all 40 images in a steady fashion as a slideshow just to introduce them and not muddle any initial reactions by starting the discussion on the images and primitively introducing themes or reasoning that might skew interpretations.
After this we went through each one and discussed the details and reasoning behind the choice of assets and what each one, to me at least, was aiming to express. Here was where we would get into the finer details of the images and discuss what elements worked well, which were less effective, and overall which images felt most in line with my stated aims and the ultimate goal of creating images that invited complex reading and reflected facets of the lived experience of neurodiversity.
Through this process, I began to note down and start selecting images to go into the final selection of around 20 – 25 images for the book. I did this by categorising the images into groups of definite yes, maybe, and definite no, with a few images sitting in-between. Images that ended up in the definite no category mostly included images that were a bit to sparsely detailed or were too clear cut in their construction when compared to the more effective, and more highly detailed compositions. The other images that ended up in the no and maybe categories were ones that either fell to the group of images that were either too similar to other more effective ones, or ones that didn’t quite have the same level of effect, either being too loose or nondescript to imply anything much at all, or ones that were too intensely detailed or structured and were too heavy on the eye to sit well with the others. However, I identified that some of these heavy images would still be useful either as cover images or on leaf pages that would serve more as a textural decoration instead of a dedicated plate in the main body of the book.
The next stage of the process would now be to repeat this process with my peers in the class to get a more rounded body of feedback before finalising the selection for the book.
Комментарии