I have critique tomorrow (sorry for the tardiness in posting), so I wanted to give a bit of an update/preamble. My thesis work is taking the form of visual poetry created in film photography. The experimental techniques I am using involve multiple, overlapping exposures over the course of an entire film strip, and I have altered my camera so that there are no breaks between frames (which creates the overlap/multiple exposure). Each frame overlaps between 1/3 and 1/2 with the frame before it, creating a visual interaction between frames and no real break or separation. Each whole roll image is then scanned and digitally printed, at a length of about 20 feet long by 2 feet wide. You read that right, 20 feet. The images hang from the top of the gallery walls and extend vertically down the wall and onto the floor for about 5 feet (currently). I am hoping this creates an immersive experience for the viewer, and a flow that would be broken by ending abruptly at the floor. Currently, I think I will have 5 of these long images together on one wall in the gallery. My reason for creating this work is my own response to what I think of as the current state of photography in our precision and speed-obsessed world. We keep making cameras more precise, shutter speeds faster, and our ability to record in heretofore impossible conditions (i.e. in the dark, in extreme temperatures, and under deep water) have reached crazy new heights. In addition, anyone can “be a photographer,” at a time when we all carry decent cameras (in the form of smart phones) in our pockets at every waking moment. So, what is the future of the medium when literally anyone with some money can buy the equipment to take “good” photographs? In my mind, the future lies in an embodied form of photography that brings the hand and breath of the photographer back into the equation. There are a number of ways to do that, and mine includes the anti-instant, a way of stretching time in image. My strategies involve more than that, but we can leave those to critique, or not. As we are constantly reminded (and probably rightly so), the viewer won’t really know all the methodologies of image creation, outside an artist statement, so those things become very secondary to the images at hand. For my critique, I will be showing a half-scale print (10 feet by 12 inches) and a full-scale detail (somewhere around 7 feet, I believe). These images are almost completely unedited, so there will be some level corrections, dust/water spot removal, and a little cropping in future iterations. I have also printed them on a paper of convenience, as I figure out what I want the physicality of the images to be. The prints are on a luster paper, and I believe a semi-matte with a slightly warmer black might be the way to go for the final prints.