Counterwork

The proposal:

At the beginning of the residency I will post a .jpg to the list. This image will be a drawing made from scratch using photoshop. It will be a simple, abstract image made using just black and white. List members are then invited to work on the drawing and post it back to the list. Everyday I will add all list members additions to the image to create a composite of all collaborations and then work on the image myself, rearranging the imagery submitted but again only using black and white to make marks. I then post the update back to the list and the process begins again. This continues for the duration of the residency (2 weeks).

(This is similar to the 'vs' image battles that exist on the web except for the fact that I will not be working a back and forth pattern (my turn, your turn etc...), particularly because I anticipate having a number of list members inputting simultaneously, I will just mix in new posts as they happen.)

The few rules are as follows:
- Only the resident is restricted to black and white. list members may add any imagery.
- The image must remain the same dimensions in pixels.
- The image may be transfered to flash or other vector software, photographed off the screen, anything list members can think of to manipulate the image. but it must return to the list as a .jpg.

The purpose of the residency is to continually challenge me to disguise, transform or hide recognisable imagery from the composite mix of those submitted. I will try to create an image that does not remind the viewer of anything - this is the composite image challenge. After each image posting I would welcome suggestions as to what the image reminds you of, and try and use these as guidelines for how (or how not) to develop the piece.

The origins of this idea come from recent thoughts about digitally created imagery; in particular drawing with a computer and using paint software as a medium for drawing, and thinking about the validity of the computer-made mark. I would like to use this residency not only to challenge myself with the task of drawing in this fashion, but also invite list members to submit their interpretation of drawing, and through this interaction to challenge me to make visual sense, through one image, of the multiple ideas submitted. The residency also reflects the broader aspects of my practice where I am exploring ideas of creating works which have no context or basis in our visual frame of reference. Through this I am examining the processes of originality and value, and the creation of belief in these ideas.

The end result of the residency will be a series of progressive images charting the development of the work, along with information on collaborators and the suggestions submitted.

A few words 07.07.05:

'The process I'm using currently goes like this:
After receiving a few submissions I open the current image and add the submissions in separate layers in the order that they arrived in my inbox. I set these layers to 50% opacity so I can see what's going on beneath each one. In some cases I leave the opacity like this, others I return to 100% and erase through them. I spend quite a bit of time experimenting with this - trying to show interesting parts of the images, letting textures come through etc... After this I then work over the image on another layer in black and white. While this is happening, or between sessions working on the draw, other submissions arrive. This are inserted into layers above the previous submissions and the process sort of restarts, adjusting what has already been done to accommodate the new input. By 9am (which is the deadline I've set myself to post) I should be ready to post the next image. So I flatten the layers, save as a jpg and email off + update the website. Having a deadline ensures I have a point at which I stop, otherwise I could just keep adding and adding and adding, which is possibly another project in itself with some kind of live feed.

'I've set myself a few extra rules as well:
I must use everything that is sent, in some form. this makes it quite difficult (which is good) as I try to do justice to everyones contribution whilst at the same time still forming a cohesive image that doesn't just look like a load of images layered ontop of each other and set to 50% opacity. Even by this third image I'm finding that I have to be quite ruthless and discard a lot of good imagery. Please don't be offended if you can't find any evidence of your contribution - it is in there!

'Due to the file size issue and post authorisation some posts are getting in a bit late. This is not a problem as I'm adding them as they arrive. For instance there are two Ana Carvalho images in the third image, purely because one from day one arrived a bit late and the one from day two arrived on time, so one is quite deep in the layering and the other is nearer the top.

'As I write this Dion Laurent's barcode image has just arrived. I'll add that in the morning.'

Mid-residency report (edit) 14.07.05:

Deleting things... and where this came from. (response to a question fro Marc Garret
'The earliest this appeared was in 'Counterwork' funnily enough - a work produced during my degree in 1998. This work was an implied performance. It was created as follows: I got all dressed up in overalls, cricket pads and masks I had made from plaster. I got a sledge-hammer, a TV, a video camera and some other props. I filmed myself for half an hour, posing and moving around. I played back the tape and, at various points, photographed from the screen a full reels-worth of pictures. I destroyed the video tape. I chose a number of these stills and made a book out of them. The book also included some text which vaguely described what may have occurred during the 'performance'. All texts were written by me but two of them were written under pseudonyms, one a Dr, and the other with a flamboyant name. (this refers to the idea mentioned above about weighty peoples' opinions). The book was then placed in the Uni library with the other performance art books. The initial inspiration for this work came from looking at Joseph Beuys and Paul McCarthy books. I was intrigued by the idea that we most often see the stills from these perfomances, and are left to create, for ourselves, any movement that may have occurred by linking images on the page. I thought 'I wonder if I can invent a performance without actually doing one?' Although there is a question mark over whether what I did infront of the camera was or was not a performance. It was not seen by anyone though. This came from a time when I was exploring ways of creating art without the actual, accepted artwork being present. The idea being that I would remove/destroy the artwork and transfer the value of the work to a secondary item. In Counterwork's case the performance is never seen and all you can see is the documentation. Through this I can create all kinds of contexts for the work and also allow the viewer to imagine for themselves what may have happened. Another work involved making a mould, casting an object from this mould, destroying the cast (whilst filming it being destroyed) and exhibiting the mould with the film of the destruction of the 'artwork'. Here, again, the emphasis is on transfering the value, or attention, of the work from the accepted artwork to something associated with the artwork. Other inspiration for this work came from such things as turner's palette exhibited in the tate. So here I deleted the artwork in order to turn attention to things connected with the work. Trying to control the value of the work and also allude to ideas of myth creation - trying to falsify background stories to the works in order to bolster their perceived value and importance. After this comes the censored books project, which is currently ongoing and to be exhibited in October this year. The project was intially formulated around the same time as the above-mentioned works but didn't commence until 2003. This consists of censoring artists' monograph books. I black out where ever the name of the artist of the book appears, where ever a picture of them appears and where ever their artwork appears. Obvious connections here with Stalinist Russia and George Owrell etc... what I'm interested in with this work is trying to provoke memory. On looking at one of the censored books you may be able to fathom which artist the book was about. Titles of works are left intact so as you look through the book you will come across works (blacked out) that you recognise by title. You then recall the work. Do you remember it properly? How many different versions of the same work will be created in the minds of the viewers? I'm trying to create a space where art does not exist (although through an artwork) and explore the ways that artists can construct or deconstruct the value of art. At the same time as this I also produced some censored net.art for my Furtherfield residency create/remove in 2004. More recently come the Glimpsed and Skybox works - digitally manipulated photographs where large areas of the image have been removed to create abstact images of recognisable things. These images are more about making a work that reflects how I see the world and imposing my perception upon the viewer. In this there are also ideas about making the removed imagery more conspicuous by it's absence (e.g. roofs and chimney shapes in skybox pictures). I feel that this is quite a powerful idea. Much of my work is about trying to get the viewer to do some of the work - to think, imagine, create... by removing things and enticing people to fill the gaps I am trying to involve the viewer in the creative process, and hopefully through this involvement the work will be more engaging.

'The basic elements of my practice are space and perception, and in particular our perception of space. The manipulation of space, whether it be filling it (blacking out) or emptying it (removing) can allow the artist to control how this space is perceived. I usually incorporate these elements in my work in some way - whether it be net.based, photography, drawing or installation.

'To see any of the above-mentioned works just type the title into the textbox on my website.

'And now, on to .jpg.
So far so good. people seem to be pretty spot on with their perceptions of the project. It has been revealed (to me also) that it is quite tyranical. I feel like a mildly benevolent dictator who, although isn't particularly mean, demands regular offerings from his subjects and does with them what he pleases. I feel that the term 'collaboration' is a little misused here although i still insist we are collaborating to an extent. I definitely feel challenged by the submissions, which was my intention. To create a cohesive image from the mix of imagery, whilst retaining parts of all the submissions, is difficult. The erasing/deleting/blacking out/whiting out that occurs on these works is part of the process of making sense of the images. I choose parts that interest me (this might be a form, a connection between lines, a colour) and try to emphasise these parts in a way that creates a pleasing image. I'm quite obviously using an abstract expressionist approach to the visual style of the images. This was intentional as I'm attempting to create images which do not look like recognisable things yet are still aesthetically functional. This is similar to the removal processes mentioned above in asmuch as I am trying to remove the things that provoke memory responses. Michael mentioned the strangeness of the situation, how I am inviting your particiapation and then ripping apart what you've done. Yet people still send things in in order to see what it is I am going to do with their submission. I'm glad I have managed to cause this kind of interest as it creates an intriguing situation, a kind of love/hate;-) plus it keeps the project going. The project is also experimental, at least for me, as I am experimenting with drawing on a computer. I am questioning myself, and my own ability with the medium. At the moment I'm not entirely convinced by the results. I am enjoying it but I'm not sure it's going anywhere yet? The spin-offs are good - Sim's bcast, the way that some submissions are being altered by other list members. I also like Alan's suggestion of the exquisite corpse, although this would take a little more thought and setting up i think? It's another project... I want to continue as we are going at the moment, with one request - to up the ante on the difficulty for me! Micheal's 'real world' submission was excellent and I want more of, as he puts it, the 'fuck you' feel to the submissions. It might be a little unfair to ask as this requires more work on your part. But look at it this way - the more work you each put in, the more work I have to put in per submission!!!'

Final report 20.07.05:

'Just a few thoughts to sign off:
'I learned a few things during the residency. A few about drawing with the mouse - it's tricky. I'm pretty pleased with the results, but not entirely convinced. The final image was, for me, a bit of a disappointment (probably due to it being the last one, therefore adding more pressure for it to be good). I ran out of time working on it this morning (9am deadline). No excuse really. Alberto Guedea's submission completely threw me too. I wish he'd submitted more work earlier, it was really challenging. Take a look at his site: http://a--g.com/18/. really uncompromising, brash digital additions to photographs.

'I was pleased to provoke such disparate responses from people, although I think I would actually prefere it if people said exactly what they felt. I found the debate around whether this was a collaboration or not a little irrelevent. We could argue the semantics of this for ages but this seemed to be avoiding actually discussing the work. What I wanted to know was 'is this a good drawing?' (and discuss what ever that means).

'With this project I was tyring to challenge myself with a task that I am not used to - namely drawing using my computer and producing such a drawing a day. Added to this was the challege of using whatever was posted to the list in response to the previous days drawing. I think this was successful. I was challenged. It was tough. Even if you think the end results are so-so. Artists should be challenged, otherwise they become complacent.

'One possible idea that occurred to me as a spin-off from this project would be to have a permanent netbehaviour image posting - a constantly changing image that keeps being altered and reposted by list members. Somebody could archive it somehow, or just let it drift and change and disappear - always in flux... something to think about?

'Favourite submissions included:
Michael Szpakowski's paint by numbers 15.07.05 and real-world painting 13.07.05
Dion Laurent's barcode 08.07.05
Ruth Catlow's tv mix 11.07.05
David Rogerson's Barry Cryer 12.07.05
anything by lo_y
Alberto Guedea's Twisted Sister 20.07.05
anything by Ana Carvalho
special mention to Joachim and Marc for their inventive use of other people's submissions and Lawrence Upton for bookending the project.
Plus Sim's bcast.
Please don't be offended if I missed you out there. All submissions were gratefully received and always a surprise.

'Thanks once more to everyone that took the time and effort to participate.'