Our new show opens this Thursday at The Mascot! 1267 Queen St W. 8pm. Jan 17th. rsvp on FB here.
About the Work:
‘the referent always adheres’ -Barthes
what makes a photograph? Some of the greatest brains of the 20th century have spent their best academic years pondering. most photographers don’t care (just like most people don’t care what academics spend their lives pondering, we just live it). we care only that we know it to be something worth pursuing. in the digital era the question becomes further complicated, as one idea of a photograph could mean simply an arragnement of data, pixels, that a computer processes to give us a final visual. it is with that in mind (as well as some help from a funky iOS app named decim8) that we started being interested in this question. and with that ponderance in mind that we created these pieces. are they less a “photograph” than other works of ours? does status as “photograph” require a recognizability of subject? does this hold up when you know that the ‘manipulation’ applied to these was at time much less than that applied to most published ‘photography’. Speaking of the digital era, Google tells us that the colloquial reference of ‘tapestry’ means ‘an intricate combination of things’. which in combination with the words of barthes (one of the aforementioned brains), seems to us to be the most succint idea of the ‘photograph’, or it could just be a good sentence for this show - an intricate combination of things with which the referent always adheres. we’re not academics, sue us.