I bought my first SLR camera while studying A-Levels. On my art foundation course I got increasingly interested in dividing up and isolating small parts of photographs to use as compositions, to the point where it would become difficult to make out what had originally been photographed. This led eventually to me seeking out surfaces to photograph that were often already unrecognisable and, therefore, what might be considered “abstract”.
I enjoyed the fact that this appeared at odds with how photography is normally regarded. To say a piece of artwork looks “photographic” is often considered a compliment to mean it is recognisable and realistic. I was aware that for many, the quality of a painting or drawing was determined by how close to a photograph it looked, and conversely that abstract artwork had little or no value.
On my fine art degree I started to produce artwork, in the form of drawings, watercolours and prints, which was very closely based on my “abstract” photographs. I wanted this work to present a challenge, in that these artworks were both potentially high quality, because they were accurate copies of my photographs, but possibly of little value, because they were abstract, at the same time.
The aerial photographs I have taken from a drone looking directly downward give a view of the world which is different from how we normally experience it. They are highly detailed and realistic in that they depict exactly what is there, but they are not conventional landscape views with a horizon. Not knowing the height from which each photograph has been taken often makes it hard to find recognisable elements to make sense of what is being looked at, and so the outcome often appears “abstract”. This offers a challenge to the viewer. The subject matter is the same, so my view is that these photographs should be appreciated in exactly the same way that conventional landscapes are appreciated.