Pg 132. Hans Gremmen and Christine Vidot

Task 1

Step 1)

Step 2)

Hans Gremmen is a graphic designer. He’s designed over 200 photobooks, several of which revolves around landscape, but he has done exhibitions as well in his lifetime so far. He works in the field of photography, architecture and fine arts.
Recently he has been doing photobooks with Japanese binding; which i thought looked so fun to do. A few hours later that thought did change, along with my blood count. But it turned out ok.

Step 3)

As I said earlier, he’s done a few landscape photobooks. But as I don’t have a lot of landscape images, I can’t make book (otherwise it would be a book overflowing with 3 amaing images). So I tried to go photography some beautfully landscapes on the coast.

Step 4)

This assignment was paradox in itself, which had me completely lost and gave up on it immediately. It wasn’t till a few weeks later that I actually went back to it, and realised that was almost the whole point of the assignment; as it’s not actually an assignment but it is.
I’ll break it down. In the ‘text’ shall we say, it talks about a teacher who says how an assignment can provide a context and a foundation to which a photographer can build upon and have a vision, whether it be clear or not depends on the photographer, but a vision non the less of what to photography. However a student questions this and states that rather give freedom an assignment takes that away, and confines the creativity one can have. And that’s it. Nothing more, nothing less.
Now you can see my confusion. How as a photographer meant to work with this. And i feel that was where i went wrong. I automatically went to trying to vision it as a still image; trying to put all these elements into one frame. I was missing the point. The assignment wasn’t meant to be like this is point A and this is point B; it is literally giving me what they are talking about in a weird way, because yes this is an assignment that is given to be, but it is open. There is no outcome; the outcome is up to my imagination. I could create anything i want for this.It is combining the two opinions and statements into one. And so that’s what i did. I combined freedom within a confine.

Travelling is a freedom. you can go wherever you want whenever you want. HOWEVER! not in any direction you want. I know it’s a sly way of doing this assignment, but hey you try! The idea didn’t really come to until my loving father drove me back to uni on the M4 North (i think? ), and he was talking about how quicker it would be if he could just drive straight and not follow the road. Of course i thought he was crazy. But thats when it did hit me, we have the freedom do anything we want as long as it’s in the confine of the law. And it reminded me of this assignment, and i’ve been obsessing over time-lapse videos and how easily it can be done through just the use of a phone. And that’s what i did.

Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *