Three of a table of carnival masks at the Fancy Dress Party, one of Harley Davidson chrome in the sun. If there's one of the carni masks that you prefer, I'd appreciate knowing why. If the whole composite thing leaves you cold, that's information, too, and I'd appreciate it. Thanks in advance!
I like mask composite #2 best. Wonder if these would read better with a background color other than white? #1 is disturbing, I think cause it appears to have been built lower right to upper left which completely subverts my English-reading paradigm. Doesn't make it bad. #3 just says "why composite?" (and "why diagonal?") to me.
I like the size distortion on the Harley, but it took a while of looking at it for me to get that.
It looks to me like each one is built around a core shot that's laid down square. Whether or not that's true, it's interesting how a shot set down square draws attention to itself and kind of controls the piece at least to my eye.
You're right that these compositions started from one central image and worked from there. That wasn't intentional, but it has been in the past (American Way Sewer II) and could well be again in the future.
I agree with the questions "why diagonal?" and "why composite?" with #3. I don't remember how #1 was put together. I think #2 with gray as a background, might look good, as it would show the holes in the middle better.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-06-02 12:43 am (UTC)I like the size distortion on the Harley, but it took a while of looking at it for me to get that.
It looks to me like each one is built around a core shot that's laid down square. Whether or not that's true, it's interesting how a shot set down square draws attention to itself and kind of controls the piece at least to my eye.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-06-02 03:40 am (UTC)I agree with the questions "why diagonal?" and "why composite?" with #3. I don't remember how #1 was put together. I think #2 with gray as a background, might look good, as it would show the holes in the middle better.
PS --
Date: 2006-06-02 03:40 am (UTC)Re: PS --
Date: 2006-06-02 03:45 am (UTC)