 |
| Mark Cowie |
MIFGS this year was an undoubted success, $20,000 of sales on the first day. This show occupies a prime position in the Carlton Gardens and is very much our show case to the world if not then to Melbourne at large. Once again the diversity of work on display made sure that there was something of interest for everyone. I would like to congratulate all exhibitors and prize winners and give a big thanks to Mark Cowie for organising such a slick show and my gratitude to Jackie McKinnon and Bronwyn Culshaw for stepping up to the mark at short notice to run publicity. Many thanks to all sitters and demonstrators for their time and effort as well as to those unseen helpers in the background. Finally my appreciation to Gael O’Leary, our visiting judge from Bayside Sculpture who undoubtedly put in much quality time determining the winning entries. I have included Gael’s criteria for determining successful entries below, it makes for interesting reading and there is a hope that it may offer a helpful template to aspiring sculptors:
I used five criteria, each awarded 10 points. These were:
1. CREATIVITY AND ORIGINIALITY
2. TECHNICAL SKILL
3. DESIGN
4. PRESENTATION
5. ARTISTIC IMPACT
I would like to expand on these points.
1. CREATIVITY AND ORIGINALITY
I was looking here for evidence of imagination, creativity and individuality. Does the piece come up with new ideas or new materials regarding any aspect of it. Or does it rehash an idea which has been seen many times before. If the subject or motif has been used before, how has the sculptor made the concept his or her own. If it is a direct copy, is it acknowledged?
2. TECHNICAL SKILL
Here I was looking at the degree of expertise in the chosen sculpture medium, demonstrating a strong command and proficiency in this medium. Have the structural limitations of the material been taken into account? If tools have been used have they been used in such a way to enhance the appearance of the work?
What was the degree of difficulty?
3. DESIGN
Here I was looking at composition – line, form, texture and space. Have elements been used in such a way as to enhance the appearance of the work? Have line and form been used effectively? Is there a sense of proportion in the elements or the piece as a whole? If texture has been used is it integral to the success of the piece? A good sculpture doesn’t begin and end at its physical perimeter. How does the sculpture activate the space inside and around it? How does the size of the sculpture affect the way it is perceived? Would it still work at a much larger or a much more intimate scale?
4. PRESENTATION
I often find that this is an often underestimated part of sculpture. The actual presentation of a sculpture can enhance or detract from the work. I looked for attention to detail; how well a piece was finished. Does the base compliment or enhance the sculpture? The quality of seamlines, joints, polishing, sanding etc are important. I was disappointed to find a lack of awareness in this area in a number of sculptures where carelessness was evident as opposed to a created or natural effect which enhanced the work. Attention to detail in the base and/or the stand used might just mean making sure it was clean and presentable.
5. ARTISTIC IMPACT
Of the five criteria this necessarily is the most subjective. The overall impression addresses the sculpture as a whole and is often based on the first glimpse of the finished piece. Without regard to the other criteria, does it stand on its own as a good and complete sculpture? Am I drawn back to it? Sometimes it is difficult to put into words why a particular sculpture appeals, it has, I guess for the viewer , a certain "wow" factor. That can be a quiet impact that draws the viewer in to just stand and look and appreciate, or it can be a strong response to subject matter, design and form.
Having said all that I can assure you nobody "failed" – some just met the criteria more completely.
My congratulations to the winners and to all of the highly skilled sculptors who were selected to participate and who made my decision so difficult.
Thank you
My conversations with fellow sculptors after the MIFGS prize presentation gave me the opportunity to touch base and listen to concerns and ideas – these may I say have been noted. Furthermore consider my door open should you wish to discuss matters: president@sculptorsvictoria.asn.au.
1. CREATIVITY AND ORIGINALITY
I was looking here for evidence of imagination, creativity and individuality. Does the piece come up with new ideas or new materials regarding any aspect of it. Or does it rehash an idea which has been seen many times before. If the subject or motif has been used before, how has the sculptor made the concept his or her own. If it is a direct copy, is it acknowledged?
2. TECHNICAL SKILL
Here I was looking at the degree of expertise in the chosen sculpture medium, demonstrating a strong command and proficiency in this medium. Have the structural limitations of the material been taken into account? If tools have been used have they been used in such a way to enhance the appearance of the work?
What was the degree of difficulty?
3. DESIGN
Here I was looking at composition – line, form, texture and space. Have elements been used in such a way as to enhance the appearance of the work? Have line and form been used effectively? Is there a sense of proportion in the elements or the piece as a whole? If texture has been used is it integral to the success of the piece? A good sculpture doesn’t begin and end at its physical perimeter. How does the sculpture activate the space inside and around it? How does the size of the sculpture affect the way it is perceived? Would it still work at a much larger or a much more intimate scale?
4. PRESENTATION
I often find that this is an often underestimated part of sculpture. The actual presentation of a sculpture can enhance or detract from the work. I looked for attention to detail; how well a piece was finished. Does the base compliment or enhance the sculpture? The quality of seamlines, joints, polishing, sanding etc are important. I was disappointed to find a lack of awareness in this area in a number of sculptures where carelessness was evident as opposed to a created or natural effect which enhanced the work. Attention to detail in the base and/or the stand used might just mean making sure it was clean and presentable.
5. ARTISTIC IMPACT
Of the five criteria this necessarily is the most subjective. The overall impression addresses the sculpture as a whole and is often based on the first glimpse of the finished piece. Without regard to the other criteria, does it stand on its own as a good and complete sculpture? Am I drawn back to it? Sometimes it is difficult to put into words why a particular sculpture appeals, it has, I guess for the viewer , a certain "wow" factor. That can be a quiet impact that draws the viewer in to just stand and look and appreciate, or it can be a strong response to subject matter, design and form.
Having said all that I can assure you nobody "failed" – some just met the criteria more completely.
My congratulations to the winners and to all of the highly skilled sculptors who were selected to participate and who made my decision so difficult.
Thank you
My conversations with fellow sculptors after the MIFGS prize presentation gave me the opportunity to touch base and listen to concerns and ideas – these may I say have been noted. Furthermore consider my door open should you wish to discuss matters: president@sculptorsvictoria.asn.au.
 |
| demonstration event |
The gossip from some of the country members focused on symposiums could one be organized. This indeed could be a worthwhile thing to do encouraging communal the sharing of skills and knowledge. If there is a way the ASV can assist then please let me know.
With regard to the Annual Show all I can say at this stage is that we are currently in negotiations with a city venue. Watch this space.
Jan Indrans President ASV
No comments:
Post a Comment