Paper sale at Kongs

We’re now getting to the point of really needing to consider ways of publicising our work and raising funds for our degree show and a paper sale seemed perfectly fitting! I’m proud to have sold 2/3 pieces and it was a great way to show how truly diverse we are as year group. Raising nearly 500 pounds was more than we ever anticipated and we hope to make more events like this which should be just as or even more of a success!

Screen Shot 2017-11-27 at 18.31.57




Marshall Mcluhan: The Medium is the message’ (Annabelle Craven session 3)

‘The medium is the message’

-Understanding media and how we read/understand messages.

-The message is an extension of our sensual nervous system.

-Everything you say effects everyone e.g.. a phone call. – A tv is a popular thing….an effect.

-Literacy forms awareness – a specialist e.g. tv personal has no objectivity.

-A quest for identity is always a violent quest e.g. sports/superheroes- Dramatising what our societies all about – A game without an audience, isn’t a game its just a practice run.

Kittler: Surface effects the interface the platform – What sit’s between us and the platform. Any media can be changed/translated into another?

Screen Shot 2017-11-24 at 17.18.48

Screen Shot 2017-11-24 at 17.19.03

-Facts? – the collapse of media – news – what’s the actual truth?

Learning about this artist, arose many questions, with one being ‘What is the truth in todays society, in terms of what’s said on the news etc?’

It feels like we can’t trust anyone these days, everything we do is stimulated over what’s ‘popular’ and what’s ‘in’, we’re not touching upon what’s more important and affecting us as a society. It seems to like the focus is on what they think we as the public want to hear whether that important or even truth. It feels like we’re losing ourselves and this sense of dignity and rightfulness. Authority comes into play, too dispersed? – There’s so many different perspectives…. It comes confusing to figure out what’s controlled and what isn’t?


These workshops are continuing to really help me question my work and how much I delve into what’s important to express about my work. It’s ‘easy enough’ to address a subject but actually looking deeper into subjects, opinions, and changes in relation to subjects which are effecting us on a daily basis, whether aware of it or not, is something I  feel strong to continue exposing. How are we controlled? How much freedom in our work do we actually have? And how do these boundaries effect the way in which we go about situations in our day to day lives?

Session 2 with Annabelle Craven ‘Transmissioners’

We are the ‘Transmissioners’

This session has really opened up mind to the depth of thinking and processes image and film really has. Considering things such as borrowing, broadcasting, and different ways in particular, are things which especially interested me. The environment you’re making the work in is just as important as the person/main object is within the frame. How can ones work be translated, for what purposes and how advanced does this need to be? does that even matter? Borrowing software, technology etc, creates an interaction aspect to the work, how this then could be translated through the following work.


Transmission – Broadcasting – Online publishing/ Ideas of communication and how one translates through this. (Time/space)

How we see our own work? Possible ideas of borrowing forms, how this then interacts with our work/ new perspectives – inventive.

The materiality of ones work? What is it made of? -The process and the software platform, use of things such as Instagram.

Hito Steyerl: (Using in my dissertation) How not to be seen: ‘A fucking Didactic Educational’, 2003. *Use of different formats *compressions *What’s actually original/edited?

How to make something invisible for the camera? *Hide *remove *to go off screen. the visibility of the camera: Resolution. Determining the visibility – not visible if not captured my the resolution? *Consider how one can; *Wipe *erase *shrink *take the picture. Resolution determines visibility, calibrates world as a picture. Pixel based resolution chart collaboration, determines how to become visible – must become smaller?

Steyerl’s essay on copy-write/Archives; *video use? *vinals *sound recording -mp3 – sound compressed which effectively distorts.

Enframing: Hito steyerl – Taken from philosopher ‘Hidigar’ – Ways of revealing, how dangerous this can be, a risk, ‘unique’. Considering different ways of enflaming such as unlocking. Distribution – who can look at the work? Forms of repetition.

Digital media – orders of revealing, in doing so, humans become part of this ‘order’.

Cardiff Made: Auctioning work


‘Just a cheeky artist trying to get my work out there more’.

After attending a Roath, Cardiff ‘Walk and talk how’, we were given the opportunity to make a piece of framed work for their upcoming auction show. Half of the money would go to their charity and half straight to us! I feel like this was such a great and easy opportunity, I just couldn’t pass on it. I wanted the work I was making to stimulate on from my diary work and the raw personal qualities I’ve pushing towards in documentary aspects. This idea of everyday found/used objects being merged into one layered piece, my own personal visual. Fragments of moments, how one can become so lost in their own work, you kind of lose where you started. I guess it feels kind of moody and stressful, and using part of my face plays back to ideas of myself becoming lost within the work and glancing at you as the viewer. Uncomforted? Should you actually be looking? – Throwing myself out there and feeling unsettled by my own thoughts and issues.



Annabelle Craven-Jones: Artist takeover&Tutorial

I am actually so happy that I went to this artist talk, initially I was finding it hard to understand the concept of Craven’s work but once she got more in-depth to these ideas of perception and so on, I was hooked.

There were a number of things that were touched up on which I was interested in. This idea of ‘consent’. She had an exhibition in Berlin where she asked to have wires connected from inside to outiside for her live broadcasting piece. She spoke about how they denied her for safety reasons with the wires but what fascinated me more so, was the fact they decided to keep a blind eye to the fact there was live broadcasting involved. Craven explained that there was notice before entering of the fact you’d be part of the work in such an invasive way from entering the exhibition. She also mentioned how she’s even considered doing that, which plays even further into this consent issue. I think people not knowing with give such a different effect but you’re then playing into the hands of the law. We have cctv cameras everywhere watching us but it’s interesting in this what I’d say ‘safe environment’ needs these precautions. And but then questions were raised of why should we as ‘artists’ get special rights? and what actually is an artist? So many questions become a ‘thing’ once you open up consent issues but it all becomes so interesting in terms of how peoples minds work and genuinally these days in society.

Craven also spoke about the different devices she uses and this interest towards compression. How the objects you use to make the work become just as interesting and importent to the process and overall outcome of ones work. She had a car compressed as part of the exhibition with her recorded device lay on top, this from what I gathered was the car she used on one of her projects where she had a broadcast/recording in Bristol of a particular area I can’t recall of. Using blue lighting and underneath orange, she was interested to see how the effects reacted and differed from oneanother. With using the blue light, she earlier learnt in her studies that this is used to keep us awake on our everyday devices such as computer and the orange to make us more drozzy (used more in the evenings). She finds it interesting on how they both impact and counteract one another, our perception can become altered without us even knowing. And this idea of compressing, keeps everything tied together and you see the whole picture she feels more so when all aspects of the work is together. Nothings fully clear, we’re essentially altered by what we’re being shown. Craven mentioned how she often borrows her devices and she is intruiged by the fact of this itself, how personal does this make the work? How important is this and how much needs to be shown?

After signing up for a tutorial, I was excited to see what Craven thought of my work and how much information she could give me. She mentioned the artist ‘Nan Goldin’ – who I’ve heard of but just never really looked thoroughly into. I mentioned my latest work where I’m questioning ‘trust’ (still based from my sleep) but how personal it’s becoming, I guess more of an investigation. Am I enjoying how sexual my ‘dream’s’ are becoming? questioning sexuality? feeling sexually assaulted? Telling myself I’m enjoying it or am I actually enjoying it? Craven said she found this extremely interesting as a topic this then led onto considering the initial devices I’m working with to express the work and how important they are? Goldin looks at sexual depandency – self portraiture…. obviously a good person to investigate. And Peter Hujar was mentioned, highly emotional yet stripped of excess, Hujar’s photographs are always beautiful, although rarely in a conventional way. Beautiful but still have this uncomfortable edge in my opinion, something slightly off about them which actually draws me in more so. This idea of playing with conflicting factors, as I am testing with currently.

Broudcasting, looking at viewer reaction to me sleeping, how comfortable or uncormfatable would this make me and what kind of responces would I get?

Algirdas Seskus – How is your work portrayed collectively as much as individually? His photographs are indistinct, blurred, messy compositions; toneless, soft, reduced images with unexciting content. Considering the how when one is taking the photo has just as much importance if not more rather than the aftermath of it. He’s not so bothered with depth of the photo but what it brings initially, ‘when the very act of photography becomes an object of art’.

Jo Spence – How invisible are we in this world and to one another? Creating vulnerability – exposure.

Scale/ different ways of presenting – what has significance?



From my gap crit the main points I have taken from it are;

*The different ways in which I present my work – How putting the projection in the dark space may have given a more professional finish.

*What do the objects and scenery speak about/for the work? – size/location.

*All staged? – Distressing? What do the layers speak about the work?

*Do I need my diaries on display? How much importance do they have in regards to the later work?

*Who is it in the images? – sexual experiences?

*The objects in the projections give character/ personality.

*Image feels like it’s coming out the page, distorted, unclear.

*Transparency/ size/ lighting – what works best and where?

*Bed sheets and placing of them make the imagery more chaotic.

*Why white sheets? – hotel room?

*How will this now translate into video work? what will work best?