BA Phot

I&P: Assignment 3, Development

Mirrors or Windows

Due: 16th May

Back - submission - rework - development - contact sheets - tutor feedback

Asg.1 - Asg.2 - Asg.3 - Asg.4 - Asg.5 - Preamble - Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3 - Part 4 - Part 5 - C&N - EyV

Batch 1 - Batch 2 - Batch 3 - Batch 4 - Batch 5 - Batch 6 - Batch 7 - Batch 8 - Batch 9 - Batch 10 - Batch 11 - Batch 12 - Batch 13 - Batch 14 - Batch 15 - Selection -

Brief

Choose ONE of the following:
A) ‘Mirror’
Choose a community that you’re already a part of. It could be your child’s nursery or your regular gym class, but it should be something that takes up a substantial amount of your interest and time.
Create a photographic response to how this group informs who you are as a person.
● What aspects of this group or community reflect on you?
● What do you share?
● How does it function as a mirror reflection of who you are?

B) 'Window’
Use this opportunity to find out about a community that you don’t know much about and tell their story. Get to know them and talk to them; learn by listening and understanding.
Your aim here is to become an insider. You’re beginning as an outsider so it is important to choose a group that you can spend a lot of time with. Negotiation skills and respect are intrinsic to working well with your subjects and are invaluable skills for your development as a photographer.
Be clear about your intentions and involve your subjects in the process in order to obtain the best results.
● What window into this world can you access through your role as a photographer?

In either case you can create as many pictures as you like but, in your reflective commentary, explain how you arrived at the final edit. The set should be concise and not include repetitive or unnecessary images. Be attentive to this aspect of production. Spend some time researching how other photographers seem to edit series of works. There’s helpful advice on editing and sequencing in Maria Short, Context and Narrative (2011) Lausanne: AVA Publishing.
Some questions to consider are:
● What order should the images be shown in?
● Are there too many repetitive images?
● Do you need to let go of earlier images because the project has changed?
● Are you too close to some of your favourite pictures and they don’t fit the sequence?
● Do you need to re-shoot any for technical reasons?
● Are there any gaps that need to be filled?
Send your final series of images to your tutor together with your reflective commentary (500 words) on this assignment.

Reflection
Before you send your work to your tutor, check it against the assessment criteria listed in the introduction to this course guide and make sure that it meets all the criteria. Make your evaluation available to your tutor. Your tutor may take a while to get back to you. Carry on with the course while you are waiting, but please don’t attempt the next assignment until you’ve received your tutor’s feedback on this one.
Reworking your assignment
Following feedback from your tutor, you may wish to rework some of your assignment, especially if you plan to submit your work for formal assessment. If you do this, make sure you reflect on what you’ve done, and why, in your learning log. I&P, pp.86-7

[not spellchecked  ]

Initial thoughts

[20Dec20] In September, while considering all the assignments and just before I started the Melting Pot page, I wrote,

I'm not in any local groups, so it's the window. I have often thought of offering my services to one or more tattoo parlours - that resembles a community. Blog, 25 Sep

The only group I really had contact with pre-Covid was workers in a Swanscombe food bank where I advised their clients on debt and benefits once a week or so. My advice group has not worked since April and I'm not sure when we'll start again, or where, so that's out.
I thought of tattoo parlours when scoping Asg.1, but kept it back for Asg.3 and yesterday London went into Covid Tier 4, so they are all closed for the foreseeable.
While I'm working on the clergy for Asg.2, I thought one of the congregations might include a choir I could Window on but that is now on hold for Covid.
Yesterday, I was reading about Hans Eijkelboom in Part 3 and encountered his Street Fusion: Bristol project that included a group of people with dogs and I thought of switching to local dogwalkers - there are plenty of them, some will consent, they don't fully meet the assignment specification, but they are a definable group with a common interest and that will have to suffice.

I started today on the was back from the shops with only my iPhone to hand. One request, one positive outcome.

Contact sheets

Simon and Bailey Simon and Bailey
Box A
1-2. Simon and Bailey
20th December 2020

Unlikely to make the final cut because it won't sensibly crop to 6x7, but at least a start has been made. Count 1.


3rd January 2021 - Batch 2

Contact sheets

[3Jan21] Gradual progress since the first subject on impulse. It is not easy to get a decent photograph. I can encounter quite a few dog walkers relatively eaily, but:
1. As an man of age, I will not ask single women or groups of children, especially in the less populated locations;
2. It does not work with dogs off the lead, they are busy elsewhere;
3. They have do be walking towards me and not too quickly and not distracted by, say, a conversation with others;
4. Some just assume that I am saying "what a nice dog", as they say yes and walk on; 5. Not many of the remainder refuse, just Anon on 26th December who insisted, "don't photograph me";
6. Dogs are not good at posing and their owners are nearly always looking at the dogs.

Nevertheless, I'm aiming to get 100.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box B
1. Monty Amy and Adam, 21st December 2020
2. Anon, 26th December
3. Max and Sheeran, 27th December
4. Lunar and Molly with their owners, 27th December
5. Marnie and Gary, 27th December
6. Hurlock and Darren, 1st January 2021
7. Spot and Janet, 1st January
8. Bonny and Dennis, 1st January

[Later that day] I should remember that, despite what I'm telling the subjects ("dogs and their owners"), I am actually targetting dogs and their owners. Suddenly I feel a lot better.
Count 8, 1 anon.


11th January - Batch 3

Contact sheets

10 Jan - 1 request, 1 refusal.

11Jan - Jessie plus 2; Dan and Helen; Millie and Gary. No refusals. Count 11, 1 anon.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box C
1. Jessie plus 2
2. Dan and Helen
3. Millie and Gary
11th January 2021

Batches 4 and 5

Contact sheets

[17Jan] It rained for nearly a week and the only photographs produced for the series was a few distant views to start a new subset which I have named Unmet, subjects with dogs from a distance and no opportunity to converse. Today was pleasant but the paths muddy and the count has risen, but I took more Unmets too, because there are some interesting configurations of subjects in the distance which I have no chance of catching up with. I do not always get the walkers names: when they refuse to say, I call that 'Anon', otherwise (in a rush or whatever) it's eg Rover 'plus 2'.

After writing the above I took a first cut of the images and will mention a new designation. One of the problems in the park is that the dogs are off their leads, excitedly active and unwilling to pose with their 'owners'. There are a few now suffixed 'sans'.

And an update on my patter. It usually runs,
'Do you mind if I photograph your dog?'
then, if affirmative, do it
then 'what's its name?'
and, if they seem co-operative,
'and yours?'.
If they ask what it's for,
'I'm trying to photograph 100 dogs'
and if they ask whether it's for SE9, a local freepaper, I explain that it's for a photo-degree, it's portraits this year and difficult to find subjects with Covid.
If they are seated, the conversation may continue to dogs, dogs' names (one of the owners in fig D8 today had a theory about dog owners who choose 'human' names as opposed to Fido, Spot etc.), or the course or occasionally cameras. If the dog is in motion, then there is not time for such things.

No refusals today, or indeed since 10th Jan.
The Count is 20 with 1 anon, 1 sans and 8 unmet.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box D
1. Unmet, 12th January
2. Unmet, 16th January
3. Unmet, 17th January
4. Buggie, sans
5. Unmet
6. Doris, Betty & Greg
7. Harvey, Gary and Linda
8. Pip, Dylan and Lottie plus 4.
9. Georgia, Gerry and Louise;
10-12. Unmet
13. Paris and Dolly with Vicky & Deine
14. Dolly & Deine
15. Unmet;
16. a distant Paris and Dolly
17. Mia plus 2
18. Meg Plus 3
19. Hope & Pat.
12th - 17th January

21st-22nd January, Batch 6

Contact sheets

[22Jan] A new park where the pace seems slower, the walkers better separated and the opportunities more apparent.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box E
1. Frankie & Louisa, 21st January
22nd January
2. Frank & Kelly
3-4. Unmet
5.Lilly, Crystal & Lisa
6. Sandy plus 2
7. Archie plus 3
8-9. Unmet
10. Zack plus 1
11. Unmet
12. the Moon
13. Lottie plus 2
14. Amber and friend plus 1 each
15. Ralph plus 2
16-17. Unmet
18. Rolf plus 2
19. Simba plus 3
20-22. Unmet
21st - 22nd January

These are all shown full frame. The variation in formats arises from using two cameras.
No refusals, the Count is 31 with 1 anon, 1 sans and 18 unmet, total 53.


23rd January, Batch 7

Contact sheets

[23Jan] Mika & Dexter, Bosco (anon) Bart, Pearl, Becca, Lexi & Lola, Blaze.

No refusals on the day, the Count is 36 with 2 anon, 1 sans and 21 unmet, total 60.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box F
1. Mika & Dexter plus 2
2. Bosca anon
3. Bart plus 1
4. Unmet
5. Pearl plus 1
6. Unmet
7. Becca plus 2
8-9. Lexi & Lola plus 4
10. Unmet
11. Blaze plus 1
23rd January

No refusals, the Count is 37 with 2 anon, 1 sans and 21 unmet, total 59.


26th January, Batch 8

Contact sheets

[26Jan] Person-eye-contact for once this morning, if not the dog, and then a couple who I have seen before but did not ask at the time as they seemed preoccupied.

Kim, the first subject suggested that I should send the snaps to SE9, our local freepaper. That's not the first time this has been mentioned and so I emailed them today.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box G
1. Rex plus Kim
2. Niko, Bobby and Lilly plus Gary
3. Joe and Flo plus Jenny
26th January

No refusals, the Count is 40 with 2 anon, 1 sans and 21 unmet, total 62.


2nd February, Batch 9

Contact sheets

[2Feb] 1 refusal, the Count is 52 with 3 anon, 1 sans and 24 unmet, total 80.

Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9
Box H
1. Dan plus 1 (again)
2. Chico plus 2
3. Thor plus 1
4. Benji plus 1
5. Jasper
6. Honey & Maggi plus 2
7. Margo & Stanley
8. Jassper plus 2
9. Callie
10. Jasmine
11. Fizz plus 1
12. Copper, Anon
13. Elvis plus 1
14-16. Unmet
17. List
2nd February

to 17th February, Batch 10

Contact sheets

[17Feb] No refusals, the Count is 60 with 3 anon, 1 sans and 25 unmet, total 89.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3Asg3 Asg3Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box I
1. unmet 9th February
2. Flash plus 1, 10th February
17th February below
3. Bella plus 2
4-5. Mabel and Benson plus 2
6. Betsy and Belle plus 2
7. Bruno plus 2
8. Ernie plus 2
9. Ruby plus John Prescott
to 17th February

to 8th March, Batch 11

Contact sheets

[8Mar] No refusals, the Count is 67 with 3 anon, 1 sans and 26 unmet, total 97 with 2 refusals b/f.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box J
1. Unmet, 20th February
2. Reggie plus Glen, 22nd February
3. Josie the Lurcher plus John, 22nd February
4. Diesel plus Cheryl, 27th February
5. Ash plus 1, 2nd March
6. Billy plus 2, 6th March
7. Pippa and Peanut plus 2, 2nd March
8. Murphy plus Kim's Mum, 8th March
Batch 11 to 8th March

to 14th March, Batch 12

Contact sheets

[15Mar] 1 refusal, fig. K3 All three refusals have been from middle-aged men.

The Count is 74 with 3 anon, 2 sans and 29 unmet, total 108 with 3 refusals. Two repeats so far - Frankie and Louisa (previously on 21st January, one of my favouries) and then Dan and Helen on 11th Jan and 2nd Feb.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box K
1. Joy and Nico, 9th March
2-3. Unmet, 9th March
4. Jessie and Jack, 9th March
5. Billy plus 1, 12th March
6. Frankie and Louisa again, 12th March
7. Unmet, 12th March
8. Teddy plus 2, 13th March
9. Sybil with Stan, Rachel and Joe (unseen), 14th March
10. Thomas plus 1, 14th March
11. Trevor without, 14th March
Batch 12 to 14th March

Date, Batch 13

Contact sheets

[30Mar] A couple of new experiences here. Fig. L2, the owner emerged from her terraced house and seemed minded to co-operate, but was soon followed by her partner who hurried the, off. Fig. L6 was proceeding as usual until I asked 'what are their names?' then the nearest walker changed his attitude and became reluctant. I sought to clarify that I was asking the dogs' names, not the walkers, but that made no difference.

The Count is 79 with 5 anon (including the two mentioned above), 2 sans and 32 unmet, total 118 with 3 refusals. One new repeat, Spot and Jane, previously on 1st January, bringing the total to 3.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box L
1. Benji and Ena, 15th March
2. Hurriedly met, 15th March
3. Rex plus, 15th March
4. Gilbert plus, 19th March, still from Exc. 4.5 video 5-6. Unmet, 20th March
7. Secretive, 20th March
8. Ludo plus, 20th March
9. Unmet, 30th March
10. Spot and Jane again, 30th March
15th March - date

text


Date, Batch 14

Contact sheets

[2Apr] Lockdown restrictions have begun to lift and so we took are first 'trip' (of sorts), on the bus to Greenwich Park. As noted with the contacts, they were 'all shot at a +3 adjustment so the originals are rather dark. The images have been recovered from the Raw versions without much trouble' and there are some which could well make the final cut.

One refusal today. I didn't ask any walkers' names.

The Count is 89 with 5 anon, 2 sans and 32 unmet, total 128 with 4 refusals. 3 repeats.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box M
1st April
1. Millie
2nd April
2. Rada, 3. Frida, 4. Otis, 5. Susie, 6. Dexter, 7. Ted, 8. Keira, 9. Thomas, 10. Porter
2nd April, Batch 14

text


24th April, Batch 15

Contact sheets

[24Apr] The highlight of the exercise so far, on 13th April, a pair of beagles called … [wait for it] … Benson & Hedges (fig. N9). Benson was named after his father and Benson's sister was named 'Hedges' by the walker's daughter in the car on the way home from picking up the puppies. Irony is not dead.

Gilbert, the first image of the batch (fig. N1), was extracted as a frame from the time lapse made for Exercise 4.5.

Following on from my comment on the previous batch, I think I have given up on the wish to ask the people heir names. Whichever 10 images make the final selection, I plan to title them with the dogs' names only and present them in alphabetical order thereof. If there is ever an extended chat, we might exchange names, but it will not be an aim — in most cases it is a passing moment, and so there is not the time check anything but the dog's name.

There are two unusually good Unmets in this batch, N11 and N18

One refusal on 20th April.

The Count is 🍾 100 with 5 anon, 2 sans and 40 unmet, total 147 with 5 refusals. 3 repeats.
There are just over 50 in the favourites section of the submission page, including a few unmets.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box N
1. 19th March, Gilbert (still from Exercise 4.5)
2-3. 5th April, Ollie; Billy
4. 7th April, unmet
5. 8th April, Alfie
6-7. 11th April, Misha; Lola, Riri & Alfie
8-9. 13th April, unmet; Benson & Hedges
10. 16th April, Dave
11-14. 18th April, unmet; Kyoto & Tink; Spot; unmet
15. 22nd April, Buddy & Teddy
16-19. 23rd April, all unmet
Batch 15

text


7th May, Selection

As stated in the introductory text on the Submission page, the brief does not specify how many images to submit. There are several criteria that could be applied. On 15th March I wrote,

I am giving some thought to how I'll select the submission. I decide how many, but let us suppose 10.
1. all those with names of both dogs and owners, then sift
1a. sift for dogs looking at the camera
2. the best 10 with dogs' names
3. 10 with Mrs. B in the background
4. 10 with the owner pointing at the camera
5. choose the best of the unmets too, although they will probably not make the cut.

Also on the Submission page at this time are thumbnails of 1. the dogs with names, 2. The Unmets, 3. my favourites - they may not all be in the final version of that page. Here are my favourites —

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 B9 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box O
The strongest images

Mrs. B.
Box P
Mrs. B.

Mrs. B.

Yesterday I selected nine that have my partner in the background. Nine fit nicely on a page, and so I will aim for nines in any shortlists I run.


Dogs looking
Box Q
Dogs looking

Dogs looking

Including Pearl (fig. Q3) with her single eye.


Best Names
Box R
Best Names

Best Names

These are, in order of encounter, Hurlock, Bosca, Dexter, Thor, Fizz, Elvis, Pippa & Peanut (Cousins), Trevor, Gilbert
and the last and greatest of them all, a pair of Beagles ironically named Benson & Hedges (siblings) — another pedestrian who passed by while we chatted burst into laughter with me.


Walkers
Box S
Best Walkers

Best Walkers

These will, presumably, figure heavily in the submission group, as the walkers are the ostensible subject and purpose of the assignment.

As with nearly all selecetions of this type, it is largely subjective, but most are looking at the camera and there is some expression of character in the image. The principal exception if fig. S7, an Unmet sans dog, where I find the stride expressive — this was photographed into the sun and so post processing is needed before a decision is reached.


Final Selection

I am writing this after selecting the Mrs. B. images, but before running any of the other lists. I assume that the final selection will be mostly the Best Walkers, while ensuring that there is a range of interest and variation. I will then reprocess from Raw for a final check.

[The next day, May 8th] I plan on choosing a dozen to process from Raw. The assignment brief warns against being " too close to some of your favourite pictures". I have some of those, P1, P9, Q1-3, Q9, R4, R9, S1-3, S5-9. That's 16 already. I'll process those and see whether there is enough variation. (Pearl was listed twice so that's 15.)

[9May]Fig. O8 did not make it into any of these categories, but it is in the final selection, bringing the total back to 16.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box T
Final shortlist
1. Marnie and Gary, 27th December 2020
2. Bonny and Dennis, 1st January 2021
3. Frankie & Louisa, 21st January
4. Lilly, Crystal & Lisa, 22nd January
5. Sandy plus 2, 22nd January
6. Unmet, 23rd January
7. Pearl plus 1, 23rd January
8. Fizz plus 1, 2nd February
9. Thor plus 1, 2nd February
10. Ash plus 1, 2nd March
11. Billy plus 1, 12th March
12. Benji and Ena, 15th March
13. Millie plus 1, 1st April
14. Frida plus 1, 2nd April
15. Benson & Hedges plus 1, 13th April
16. Unmet, 23rd April

If I'm still aiming for 10 in the final submission, the first pass for the strongest images (that is the ones I think to be so intuitively-æsthetically, while trying to ignore my memories of and attachment to the people and dogs involved):,

T1 - one of the first and something of a benchmark for what followed:
T2 - the walker is good, the dog not;
T3 - a natural, relaxed stance from both dog and walker;
T4, T8, T10 and T12 are rather similar and there should probably be no more than two of these in the final cut;
T5 and T6 - both stand out from the rest (re my comments above, I found a bit of the dog in the fuller Raw image) but I'm not sure whether they should both be in. Perhaps I could use them as 'bookends' or maybe reverse one;
T7 - I find one-eyed Pearl and her secretive walker hard to resist, but that's playing favourite memories;
T9 - is the only walker I recall 'striking a pose' (a little like Susie from the Red Cross in Asg.1);
T11 - one of the most striking compositions due to the length of the lead and also the attitudes of both dog and walker;
T13 - a unique pose in the whole set with eye contact from both parties;
T14 - identical comments to T13 with the added interest of canine action in the background;
T15 - it is unlikely that I will drop Benson Hedges, firstly because I love the names but also because the walker is the only one noticeably carrying a bag of dog fæces, a vital accessory of dog-walking;
T16 - this was a rather unexpected inclusion, one of the last images and an unmet. The dog, the walker and also the girl queueing for the unseen ATM, all of whom seem to have noticed the camera. I was experimenting with a long lens that day and the images might benefit from reprocessing if I use it.

Mrs. B. in the background never was an important criterion, but I'd be loathe to lose them all.

Inexplicably, having gone through all the batches to check the names, I have realised I left out two more worth consideration. They are shown below figs. U1 and U2, together with a possible gathering for submission, acting on the comments above, fig. U3.

Asg3 Asg3 Asg3
Box U
1. Unmet, 20th February
2. Teddie plus 2, 13th March
3. first cut

text

text

text

Asg3
Box N
1.
Date, Batch 16

text


Date, Batch 17

Contact sheets

[8Mar] text

text

Asg3
Box N
1.
Date, Batch 17

text


Date, Batch 18

Contact sheets

[8Mar] text

text

Asg3
Box N
1.
Date, Batch 18

text


I&P Asg 1 References

Boothroyd, S. and Roberts, K. (2019) Identity and place [I&P]. Barnsley: Open College of the Arts.

author, (year) Title. Location: Publisher.

author (year) title [online]. website. Available from url [Accessed nn January 2020].


author (year) Title. Location: Publisher.

author, (year) Title. Location: Publisher.

author (year) title [online]. website. Available from url [Accessed nn January 2020].

author, (year) Book Title. Location: Publisher.

author (year) Title. Journal. Vol, pages.

author (year) Title. Newspaper. Date. pages.


Page created 11-Oct-2020 | Page updated 09-May-2021