I wanted my final piece to be remnant of my first assessment. I wanted to explore ‘glitch’ less in the concept of erratic imagery, and more in terms of a loss of information and data. Glitch has been defined as a “sudden malfunction or fault”, but I wanted to explore glitches being a result of constant ‘selfieism’ and social media. With the current and growing lust for social media and all its market share, it’s definitely an interesting thought and visual to see what it’s doing to our images. We strive for the best quality, but ironically are removing the condition of our images.
We constantly upload photos to Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr etc. Over the range of social media, 1.8 billion images are uploaded every day. Reasoning behind uploading images has commonly been quoted as “every human being has the need to gain recognition about what he or she does in life”.
My work was inspired and has many features of Pete Ashton’s, Sitting In Stagram (2015). Ashton reposted the same photo to Instagram 90 times and over that period of time watched it deteriorate and go from high resolution to grey nothing. In one of my experiments I replicated his work to see the changes first hand. It was interesting to see that the world is constantly evolving and getting new technology (the new iPhone 6s’ camera alone has 12 megapixels) but our images are deteriorating more than every with our constant need to post more and more. There are so many accounts dedicated to celebrity status, with re-posts happening of the Kardashian’s everyday. This is not a bad thing, and I don’t want to align myself with criticising this model, my research just wants to show and acknowledge these rapid changes in society.
My work showcases the transition and deterioration of an image, by reposting and screenshotting the image 92 times over a range of social media (Facebook, Instagram and Tumblr). I did this on my iPhone. I wanted to use range of social media as this is usually the case in real life. It is common for one account (especially a celebrity account) to post an image, then for it to be uploaded on other sites.
My work consists of two, A2 prints, displayed side-by-side. I used an image of my brother that I took earlier for experimentation purpose. I covered the flash of my camera with blue cellophane, in the hopes of glitching the camera from doing its intended purpose. Liking the colour and the aesthetic I decided to use the image. I wanted my work to display all the process and documentation in the final as I think its importance is paramount in its finality. In assessment one, I just showed the final image, with no context. Whilst I think it worked int tandem with the actual image used, after hearing feedback from the class, I wanted to remove all anonymity of how I got the final work.
The first poster displays the image used, with the final morphed and glitched image underneath. I like the way that the most change is displayed that big. It is an in-your-face model of what is happening to our images and social media’s re-sizing regulations. The second poster is every 92 image re-post of what it took to get to the final image. I stopped at 92 because I was happy with the loss of quality. I like how the transition isn’t that recognisable when looking at it from relatively far away. You have to stand close to the image to see the changes (also a nod to how in-your-face re-posts and social media is to humanity).
izzy806
amandla
dailybridgerton
discoholicmusic
