For our midterm project, I thought the critique went very well. I was very interested in hearing what some of the people had to say and here are a few things I found particularly important.
1) Amy Lobasso and a few others had mentioned the significance of someone being "in front of a crowd" and how she/they in particular are not scared of those types of situations. I thought that it would be a good thing to think about and in going forward in the project (if we were to in the future), we could find a way to make that more clear, or to change the subjectivity of the placing of importance or focus on a person entirely.
2) There was a number of people who had said that they didn't quite understand the imagery and that possibly giving the person a task to show the variations of the heartbeat would be interesting. I agree with this logic because I think it would be cool or better if we would have had them do some kind of karaoke, physical activity, etc. to show the variation and make for a better statement about the project. I also think that the sensor needed to be stabilized more because we were having issues with it towards the end of our project.
3) I also enjoyed the idea of constraining someone and possibly having them confined in a chair or something with a large spotlight on them. This would induce more of the anxiety that we were possibly going for. I wanted for the viewer or the participant to feel uncomfortable, so doing this kind of "interrogation style" of artwork would be interesting for me. Possibly playing with darkness and the only focus would be on the lighted person.
Overall, we had some issues with our project, but we worked through it to create a digitalized manifestation of the heartbeat, a biological function. I think we were successful overall, but with some room for improvement definitely.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment