Series vs sequences
This week has all been about understanding the difference between a photographic series and a photographic sequence, first in the module leader lecture and then through my one to one tutorial. So where am I?
As far as I understand it a photographic sequence is work which is connected, obviously, to that which has gone before it, so,
Bernd and Hilla Bercher:
And, Ed Rusha
Duane Michals makes series but calls them sequences
While a series is putting work together doesn’t have such an obvious connection yet can still allow the viewer to discover a pattern, narrative or connection.
Then we have the extremes with the work of Wolfgang Tillmans, who not only mixes up his subject matter but also the means of displaying them in exhibitions,
which leads us into collage such as with the work of Gilbert and George.
Having said that, things are not quite that simple, there is real beauty in seeing a collection of images that share the same aesthetic within a series, look at the work of Erwin Olaf where each image is shot with the same lighting and miss-en-scene
or Gregory Crewdson, who might have more loosely connected subject matter but the way they are outputted, framed in the same way and at the same size makes them feel more connected.
In my own work, I have gone from producing large series, such as the book I made in 2017 featuring 100 women photographed in their homes,
to the book currently in production featuring six or seven different approaches, with about a dozen examples of each spread apparently randomly throughout the book.
After today’s tutorial I shall be attempting to put works together that are linked conceptiuallybuty not necessarily visually, this is the scariest thing I have tried to date, but as I have the greatest of respect for my tutor I owe it to myself to follow her suggestion, take a deep breath and dive right in.
Wish me luck.