After deciding I wanted to make a photobook out of an artefact, a Sainsbury’s bag, I gave it a trial run. I used and iron to melt the plastic bag together to make a thicker page for the images to be stuck to. Some of the bags I over melted so that the size and shapes are different. I haven’t printed out any of the actual images because I wanted to see how the book would feel as a test. However, I feel that it is really flimsy and doesn’t give enough credit to what the cause is.
I am glad I trialled this because now I need to re-examine how I want to present my photographs.
This made me think of other site specific photographers and how they has presented their work. This reminded me of Brian David Stevens’ ‘Writers’; he photographed obscure portraits of graffiti artists and their work. He printed the images cheaply in black and white on A0 size and taped them to the railings and walls where the graffiti is. I think this is effective way of viewing work, because it is unexpected to have something that is already there photographed right before you. It makes the audience reconsider the art.
Presenting my work like this without explanation of what the work is about would offer a wrong judgement of what the photograph represents. With it being in a public space, I ask myself, does the general public really want to know? At the same time, as I’ve argued throughout that the streets are the rough sleeper’s homes, I must be sensitive towards information given- highlighting that a pavement of cigarettes is a place of the homeless has negative connotations and may upset the street sleepers. Similarly, having a QR code in or next to the image can mean that people can access the information online instantly; yet this restricts the information from the street sleepers without smart phones.
It is a tricky decision. However, I feel that if I caption the images ‘Street Home #01, #02’ and so on, then the titles themselves relate to my argument.