210630 Request for folio review recordings
Request for folio review recordings.
Updated 14 July 2021
I requested a link to the recordings for the folio presentations on 30 June. Although I did receive an initial response no links were provided. I sent a follow-up email on 13 July and received the link. The link has been posted in my assessment feedback with a note to “view recording for assignment feedback”.
I believe this is inadequate for a semester 3 student and for an assignment that is worth 50% of the course grade and considering the manner in which some of the review panel conducted themselves.
Email
Posted 30 June 2021
Fashion and professional conduct
Margit presented today.
A lecturer from the RMIT fashion cohort was in attendance.
Alison's conduct was unprofessional. Mainly opening the session by claiming, "ok, we are going to do this one formally". To emphasise the importance of one student above others is an abuse of authority and departure from the high standards one should expect of RMIT.
Inviting a lecturer from the fashion department was intriguing as the MoP were ill-prepared for delivering the project and holding a professional discussion concerning fashion.
Rebecca stated that the primary objective should be photography, not fashion.
The review panel agreed in a complete turnaround from how the review began, emphasising commercial possibilities.
I asked Margit if she had researched the ethical and environmental issues related to fast fashion. She had not.
I feel Bronek tried to bully and embarrass me in his response to my question. I am not intimidated by him.
Although I appreciate how excited people are about Margit's work, it would be worth considering private consultations with potential collaborators, thus offering a safe environment for all parties to openly discuss their objectives while maintaining the excellent standard of equality and shared learning that RMIT is renowned.
Below is an excerpt of an email sent to Shane.
Friday 25 June 2021
Hi Shane,
Good to see you in class today, and sorry I didn't have time to catch up afterwards (I had an appointment I was running late for!).
Margit's presentation was all class as to be expected! A stunning outcome of a fascinating concept.
I wanted to follow up with you on my question about fast fashion as I believe it is imperative, even if the primary objective is photography.
When I hear sustainability, H&M, and consumer in the one structure, particularly in the position of "solution", I am immediately drawn to thinking about the horrendous ethical and environmental impact of the fast fashion industry.
The response to Bronek's comment about "consumer accessibility" would depend on a person's position on sustainability in the textiles industry and fast fashion.
Also, it is worth considering there is a massive market for bespoke products – including fashion.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with placing Margit and her talent in the mass consumer marketplace. Forgive me if I misunderstood Bronek's direction on this.
The likes of H&M have their garments made in regions of great poverty, exploiting the local communities while providing little security. Much of the work takes place in unsafe conditions, and yes, lives are lost. Then there is the environmental impact.
Consumerism and fast fashion are multifaceted issues that promote waste in producing throw away goods and dubious industrial practices.
Discussing sustainability and textiles with fast fashion (pros or cons), ethical and environmental issues are immediately brought to the forefront.
My comment also considers RMIT's position on environmental issues and social justice.
Interestingly, so many people, including the affluent, scream injustice, but when it comes to that hot leopard print top for under $30, dang girl!
Anyhoo.
I hope this finds you well.
Thank you,
Zo
Sent as a postscript
Friday 25 June 2021
I feel that understanding these relationships could be of great benefit in continued project development and, through photography, establish an irrefutable position of contributing to a solution.
Unsent email
Friday 25 June 2021
Hello Shane, Alison
Thank you for your ongoing support.
Although I understand everyone is busy with professional and personal commitments, discussing the issues outlined below is necessary.
As you may recall, there was an issue last year with several review panel not being prepared for formal presentations, particularly in familiarising themselves with student's work.
Being in Semester 3, to be told by a review panel member that they have not seen any of my work leading into my folio presentation (50% semester grade) is remiss of their responsibility. Stating that I have not provided adequate documentation is unfathomable.
Additionally disappointing is that the above-mentioned comments are not reflective of the unbiased and exemplary standards of RMIT educators.
Please advise on how this issue will be resolved moving forward.
Respectfully,
Zo Gay
Keywords
Reviews, Folio presentations, Semester 3, Studio, Email
Semester 3 reviews
I have written to Shane expressing my concern with the lack of reviews. The communication is objective and professionally polite.
Shane has replied, saying that he will discuss with Alison. This is of no concern to me. Sadly, the only response I have had to the last 5 emails sent to Alison has been once in berating me for getting the list of models to her without enough notice although the previous three emails (list of models) did not receive a reply.
The emails I have sent have been structured in a business-like manner with legitimate requests.
I do find it interesting that the comment Alison left on my internship assignment (which had nothing to do with the assignment at all) has now been removed (after I made a formal complaint). Sadly, the bullying and passive-aggressive behaviour continue. An additional interesting note is that I have found out I am not the only one.
From: Zo Gay <s9753760@student.rmit.edu.au>
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2021 8:09:15 PM
To: Shane Hulbert <shane.hulbert@rmit.edu.au>
Subject: Reviews – Semester 3
Hello Shane,
I hope this finds you well.
You have always been supportive and acknowledge the importance of students participating in the overarching discourse of art and photography, the MoP cohort reviews (2020) are one of many examples.
I am concerned that Semester 3 students have not had a review this year, especially as the folio presentation is worth 50% of our grade.
The reviews are invaluable for many reasons, including having the opportunity to participate in a broader discussion of art. In addition, they were an essential part of the learning process for me last year.
I understand everyone is very busy with professional and personal commitments and do not expect a response. However, I do feel that discussing the issues is necessary.
SV 210615
Meeting agenda
Folio
Works, substrates, presentation.
Writing
Submitted assignments for LCP and Studio for feedback.
Revised LCP Objectives and Rational assignment for troubleshooting and additional feedback.
Studio Critical Review assignment for feedback, time permitting.
High priority
Objectives – They are what I am having the most trouble with.
Opening two paragraphs of rationale – I don’t understand what Jan is suggesting.
Notes
Swap paragraph 1 and 2
First paragraph: How and why (what I used and why) - how does this connect to my methodology.
Second paragraph: Story.
Objectives
Incorporate sentences to encapsulate each objective.
Do not repeat.
Ensure each element is covered.
How do art and music relate to the project?
Explain more clearly.
What role does music play in the research?
Community and cultural hub.
Comes in through interviews with musicians.
Can I be fucked explaining this part of the process?
Probably not. It is probably no longer relevant other than these people are my mates and kindred spirits.
Music no longer has a part to play in this project or in my research.
Although, art and the creative process is still a critical factor and relates directly to my research.
Research question.
David doesn’t understand the question.
Break it down and simplify.
Be clear and concise.
Should read intangible, NOT temporal.
Be more concise and better articulate objectives what, how and why.
Fragmentation inspired by gestalt (reference fragmentation.
Explain “novel gestalt”.
Haptics – Subjects.
Haptics – Part of methodology (explain).
Performative collaboration in ICMX and photograms – Subjects.
General
Rewrite objectives, statement and rationale. Check active verbs, transition words, answer words and question words.
Be mindful of what, how and why.
Double-check writing notes.
210601 SV
David and I viewed a number of prints in 2.2.1 before lockdown. Standing in front of works is essential. Even proofs or roughs on newsprint count. The feedback David provided was very valuable. We discussed image sequence for the in-camera multi-exposure (IMX), orientations, substrates and print methods. I have provided David with a PDF for discussion in our SV meeting today.
Meeting notes
Today’s meeting was very productive. Having an agenda is beneficial, particularly to keep me on track as I do tend to digress!
Meeting agenda
Writing: Theoretical influences?
Writing: Email David Language of Creative Practice (LCP) assignment drafts and revised previous submissions for comment.
Images and concept: Connecting elements of project photographically — Abstract (lines, shadows, webs) representing brain activity (rhythmic) when viewing and making art.
Images and concept: Smoothing project with smaller portraits. Introduce gentle undulations.
Images: Supplied PDF of images as requested to review and discuss.
Handmade works: No new photogravure or screen prints to show due to lockdown.
Expanding too much.
Hold on till semester 4.
Shoot roll.
Focus on photograms.
Transparency.
Multi exposures.
Keywords
SV, Studio, Semester 3, Development of practice, Image review
Liquid emulsion 1
I’m starting to research making liquid emulsion prints on hard surfaces such as glass and perspex. The chosen substrate must be treated with a base coat of varnish before printing so the image adheres to the surface. I am also researching how to make the finished print weatherproof.
Fotospeed Liquid Emulsion is the preferred product for this project. After trying several different brands of liquid emulsion, Fotospeed produces the best and most consistent results.
The Fotospeed LE spec sheet advises using Griffin Varnish (readily available) on substrates such as glass and ceramics. There are readily available water-based alternatives.
I am looking forward to experimenting with and small pieces of perspex and vinyl and seeing how effective the water-based varnish is as a base-coat and in waterproofing the liquid emulsion prints.
Keywords
Semester 3, Liquid Emulsion, Alternative darkroom printing, Varnish
References
Ekerseleys n.d., ‘Chromacryl Water Based Finishing Varnish’, viewed 9 February 2021, <https://www.eckersleys.com.au/chromacryl-water-based-finishing-varnish>
Eckersley’s n.d., ‘Winsor & Newton General Purpose Varnishes’, viewed 9 February 2021, <https://www.eckersleys.com.au/winsor-newton-general-purpose-varnishes>
Eckersley’s n.d., ‘Winsor & Newton Dammar Varnish’, viewed 9 February 2021, <https://www.eckersleys.com.au/winsor-newton-dammar-varnish>
Fotospeed n.d., ‘LE30 Instructions’, PDF, viewed 9 February 2021, <http://www.fotospeed.com/media/Instructions/LE30%20Instructions%20-%20sgl%20sht.pdf>
Fotospeed n.d., ‘Liquid Emulsion’, viewed 9 February 2021 <https://www.fotospeed.com/LE30-Liquid-Emulsion/products/1288/>
Fotospeed n.d., ‘Liquid Emulsion MSDS’, PDF, viewed 9 February 2021, <https://www.fotospeed.com//media/cms/Darkroom/Liquid%20Photographic%20Emulsion.pdf>