ssartZ406 / Gallery professional practices / SPRING
2017/JAN. 20, 2017
Functional
considerations:
- Has
traffic flow been planned for in this exhibition? Could you foresee any
bottlenecking or problems with traffic flow? Explain.
The
flow of the exhibition makes sense, it flows. The gallery space isn't a typical
shape, there's pockets and height changes that have to be worked around, but
it's worked around. I can see a
bottleneck effect happening, the entrance is narrow and angled oddly, and I've
personally experienced the struggle of trying to go in and out of the gallery
when it's crowded.
- Do
exhibition materials seem durable? What are the materials used both in the
artworks and in interpretative materials? Would you make changes to
interpretive materials? If so, what would they be?
I'm
not entirely clear on what the question is asking- by "exhibition
materials" do you mean the art pieces themselves for this exhibition, or
in general? For this exhibition, it varies. Mark's piece's are heavy and
grounded, while Jodi's piece's are delicate and carefully suspended. Randi's ceramic pieces, which is an
inherently decorative and functional medium, doesn't have the delicacy of most
ceramics, because of the way it's cemented in the resin. As far as this exhibition, the permanency and durability of these works vary
from person to person.
- Are
the reading heights of the labeling and the height at which works are hung
comfortable? If not, why not? Be specific.
Are there any dangerous aspects within the exhibit? If so, what are they?
Could a disabled person experience most of the exhibit? If not, why not?
The
label for the wall hanging pieces is at a comfortable height, where it's easy
to see but not distracting to the work, but with the 3D work, some time the labels
take some searching to find. The way
Mark's central piece has the tree sticking out is the only potentially
dangerous aspect I can think of. The
exhibit seems like it would be mostly accessible to people with disabilities,
the only problem might be maneuvering around the sculpture pieces.
- Is
the chosen typography easy to read? If so, why? If not, why not?
The
font for the labeling is easy to read. It's a good neutral font that's clear
and doesn't strain the eyes.
Formal
considerations:
- Describe
the typographic aesthetics: evaluate its effectiveness. How do the choices
of fonts complement or detract from the artwork? Can you think of an
exhibition where you found the written materials/didactic materials
especially effective? If so, what do you remember about them?
The
font of the labels is aesthetically minimal, and doesn't conflict with the
exhibit. It neither compliments of
detracts from the artwork, it states the facts without intruding. I can't think of any exhibition where the written
materials stood out as being exceptionally effective.
- Is
there visual unity of elements/components within the exhibit? Explain why
or why not? If you could make changes, what would they be?
Maybe
if I were to change anything about the exhibition I'd put Mark's piece with the
tree in the back, and move his credenza in the tree's place, but really that's
just nitpicking, the layout is effective as it is.
- Does
the exhibit seem to have a visual style? If so, describe it. Is it
appropriate?
The
exhibition as a whole is definitely contemporary. There are a few pieces,
namely Jussila's, which seem more expressionist in nature than contemporary,
but it isn't a stark difference between all of the other work in the show, and
doesn't disrupt the flow of the exhibition space.
Conceptual
considerations:
- Describe
the overall message of the exhibit (as you understand it) in one sentence.
I
saw the meaning and purpose of the exhibition being a showcase of the faculty's
talent. There wasn't an overarching theme that I picked out immediately other
than it being a showcase.
- Does
the exhibition have a linear sequence (a beginning and ending point), or
is it a fluid sequence (the visitor can start at any point in the exhibit
and move to any other point?)?
The
exhibition space is free flowing, you can start at any point and end at any
point. It's arranged in such a way that creates a flow that moves you
throughout the space, but it's more like a suggested pathway than a strictly
directed path.
- Is
the type of sequence effective? If not, how would you improve it?
It
depends on the theme of the exhibition, but I personally thinks it's effective
to let the patrons to move around the space in a way that feels most natural to
them.
Visitor
observations:
- What
do you believe would be the most and least popular aspects of this
exhibition for visitors under the age of 25?
The
more popular aspect of the gallery might be that it's in a school, and not an
isolated space that they might not otherwise visit. The gallery itself isn't
open, so when you're in there, there isn't the feeling like you're being
watched by people walking by in the hallway, it's a more personal experience.
- What
are the most and least popular aspects of this exhibition for visitors
over the age of 25?
The
least popular aspect might just be that it's more contemporary art being
displayed, and it's not the western landscapes and scenes that everyone around
here is so used to seeing. Assuming the
older demographic isn't enrolled, just the location of the gallery is kind of
out of the way, and not the easiest to get to if you've never been before.
- Can
visitors share their experiences of the art with others, or are they
designed to be individual artistic experiences? Explain. What changes
might you make to improve the possibility of viewers discussing artwork
with one another?
There's
nothing that's preventing people from sharing their experiences. I think maybe
a smaller, more intimate outer gallery space could encourage discussion, but
really, I'm not sure if you can force discussion.
- If
you could change one thing in this gallery space, what would it be? Why?
If
I could change anything about the gallery space, I'd want it to be more
uniform. Like an equal rectangle, with
the ceiling one height.
