My creative exploration concentrates on the transmutation of the scientific image, by a subjective interpretation of digitally captured environments. A new image is then rendered through a systematic organization of linear mechanics.
The reference materials I primarily use are from remote viewing devices that, by way of scale, distance, or other prohibitive means, separate the human observer from the object. This disjuncture, between direct observation and observation by proxy, is relatively similar to the anecdotal account of Albrecht Durer’s depiction of the rhinoceros in 1515.
His woodcut was derived from a simple sketch and a few lines of descriptive text sent to him from another artist, without his ever actually having seen a rhinoceros. Durer’s interpretive likeness, though not accurate, created an iconographic ideal and was the sole signifier for rhinoceroses in Europe for some time.
The function of my art, visually, is to reconstitute subjects presented through scientific research, (via electron micrography, deep sea photography, or deep space imagery) into idealized forms. This method is perhaps more akin to an 18th century naturalist’s catalogue of documented specimens from far off lands, returning to be deciphered and judged under the reigning doctrines of the day.
I predominantly select images of algae, pollen, and arthropod morphology created with an imaging apparatus made for the scientific community. My references are restricted by the limits of the technology used to capture them, and by embellishing ambiguous detail, I’ve substituted the digitizing and coding process with my own drawing technique. As a result I deliberately enhance the drama of forms to create semi-fictional delineations on paper.
My mediums of choice are 2H and 2B pencil leads for graphites and colored pencil for the monochrome works. My paper preferences are Stonehenge and Lenox 100
Get the Full Experience
Read the rest of this article, and view all articles in full from just £10 for 3 months.