Closing: June 6, 11-4pm
Larissa Leclair has teamed up with One Hour Photo to feature photographers from this exhibition. Read the initial post here. Today’s photographers are Chad Dawkins, Alex Wein, Belinda Haikes, Mark Regester, and Dean Valadez.
11-noon: Chad Dawkins
Describe the photograph selected for One Hour Photo in three words:
refers dually to
How does one go about selecting a photograph that is good enough for an exhibition but that can never be seen again?
The same way one goes about selecting anything. Almost anything is worth seeing once, very few things are worth seeing again.
What are your thoughts on letting go of this image?
My thoughts on letting go of this image supersede my feelings about keeping it.
Website/Blog: chaddawkins.blogspot.com
12-1pm: Alex Wein
Describe the photograph selected for One Hour Photo in three words:
Legs, House, Levitation
How does one go about selecting a photograph that is good enough for an exhibition but that can never be seen again?
This photograph was an alternative angle from one of the pieces I shot for my Dreamscapes series in 2009. I ended up not using it as the final image but still thought the photograph was strong.
What are your thoughts on letting go of this image?
Since it wasn’t used as the final image, I’m okay with only exhibiting this piece once because I never even thought it would be seen in a gallery.
Website: http://www.alexweinphotography.com/
1-2pm: Belinda Haikes
Describe the photograph selected for One Hour Photo in three words:
Americana, obsolete, open road
How does one go about selecting a photograph that is good enough for an exhibition but that can never be seen again?
I have been working with a series of photos I took from the car as I drove across country for a while now. The images come into and out of my practice, taking different forms. Each photo in the series has an odd, antiquated feel to them, which is due to the point and shoot camera that was used. In a way you can feel that it is a bad film camera. I decided this was the series to draw from, to capture the fleetingness of the image, to reinforce the meaninglessness and specificity of the photographic image in the digital age. Taking materiality of increasingly obsolete technologies and allowing them to become metaphorically obsolete was really appealing to me.
What are your thoughts on letting go of this image?
Letting go of the image, and the values we project onto them can be hard. It kinda reminds me of the old joke from undergrad, the one where we question if an artist draws a ‘masterpiece’ on a napkin with water, is it art? Is it art if it no longer exists? I think that is what really drew me to this curatorial project, it forces the artist to think about the value of permanence in the digital age, while forcing us to deal with it on a personal level too.
Website/Blog: www.belindahaikes.com
http://lifeuniverseandart.blogspot.com/
http://lovingthemark.blogspot.com/
2-3pm: Mark Regester
Describe the photograph selected for One Hour Photo in three words:
iconic, ironic, melancholic
How does one go about selecting a photograph that is good enough for an exhibition but that can never be seen again?
I was going through a bunch of old photos and found this image that I had forgotten about. I had always wanted to use it for something but never had the right project, this seemed like just the thing. Plus it just seems to me that the image would look good projected on a wall. This is such a wonderful, intriguing concept for an exhibition. I’m honored to be a part of it.
What are your thoughts on letting go of this image?
I’m thrilled to let it go. There are bazillions of photos waiting to be taken, why be precious?
Website/Blog: http://dothejerk.wordpress.com/
3-4pm: Dean Valadez
Describe the photograph selected for One Hour Photo in three words:
simulated, screen-filtered, micro-narrative
How does one go about selecting a photograph that is good enough for an exhibition but that can never be seen again?
This was admittedly difficult. I ended up arguing and then reasoning with myself and realized that I do similar things already with my paintings and collages, which tend to exist in one form for quite some time until I eventually see how they should exist as something else. Many of my works – paintings, photos, prints, videos – have their own life for a year or two before becoming hybridized or cannibalized into their new identity: I will cut them up to collage them, repaint them, or re-edit them in some sort of way. Most of the time, the general public never sees the original form of my artwork. What is on my website and what is shown in galleries is always typically the altered variant. This sort of continuous rediscovery of how something should be finalized questions the finalization process; I realized that this natural response to my work has become its own process. So what I found would work best is an image that has a strong ground – a ground, so to speak, to what I anticipate will be future works; a sort of scaffolding or armature for what may come after it, but where the armature itself is still an interesting form that if the building were never built, the armature has a reason to exist on its own right. But also, should the grand architect decide to continue building upon the armature, the figure has a ground upon which to exist, even if that ground should be lost and not seen.
Thus, knowing that I will never see ‘Game Show Contestant’ again is already familiar – a bit unpleasant right now, perhaps, but, nonetheless, familiar.
What are your thoughts on letting go of this image?
I initially was hesitant to submit work for the show due to this reason. Yet, due in part to my pre-existing conceptual structure, which itself envelopes mediating technology and their resultant images, I felt the conditions of the exhibition buttressed the notion of fleeting imagery commonplace to everyone who encounters a screen. We all let go of our screen imagery. This temporal position of imagery only made sense for my work.
Website: www.deanvaladez.com