The final night was quite incredible. Small edits to the footage, courtesy of the Installation and Editing crews made an almost unfathomable difference to my footage (alongside others), which had previously been washed out and overexposed from the projectors.

It was gratifying to see the cumulation of roughly a month and a half’s worth of behind the scenes / in front of the computer work come to fruition, and with the support of our family, friends, strangers, passerbys, SIGNAL crews, and Robbie. Also, the people watching that ensued from our exhibition opening was quite interesting and ties quite keenly back into the entire impetus of this studio:

Specific to Site.

Though one could play puns on the term and round it off to be “Specific to Sight”, it was indeed an eye opening experience to watch the public respond to the works and respond to us responding to the works. For instance, several strangers came up to and simply watched the projections of their own accord. Others, witnessing a group of students gazing upwardly mirrored the same, half from conformity (contemporary psychology does have its merits here), half from autonomous curiosity. The result was as dichotomous as it was specific to the site; as we amalgamated with the landscape, by default of our numerous bodies we became an event-making entity, a thing on itself to be viewed, and finally, a platform on which to point to the site itself.

I suppose what interests me now further, is how people respond to the work without the presence of bodies. But this seems to be a paradoxical question which cannot be answered with my presence to gather the evidence. It’s a bit like Shrodinger’s Cat, or perhaps the lesser used but more philosophically convoluted logic of Nagarjuna’s Tetralemma:

neither true nor neither false.