artist lectures

Over the semester i went to two artist lectures. and to be honest I don't feel that they should be required. Not to say that looking at other artist work is not impotent. but limiting the artist lectures to the ones hosted by UNH are rather limiting.
The artist lecture that I most enjoyed was Michael Cardinali presentation of his body of work. He showed his progression through art school, as well as his graduate work and post graduate work. Michael showed how his life experience and location played a large role in what he was producing. The best part about the lecture however was what I knew about him already. Michael had a body of work that consisted of NY at night. Which I found funny because the first night photography project that I ever did he told me about a photographer that did night photos of people in office buildings and that your could see people working  at there desks. What he did not say was that photographer was him.


The other lecture that I went to, I regret to say, I can't remember his name. He was a Painter that focused on imagination. he never used still life or models in his paintings. All of what he painted was from his imagination. But what he talked about was less about the final product and more about the process. don't get me wrong i enjoy process art and feel like for painting process art is valuable. But when it comes to photography process art takes on a completely different form. There is a lot of pre-visualization that goes into the post production work. The lecture was good, but not meant for me.