Performance wasnt something that I intended to do. I was doing work that was about process, about the meaning of the making, trying to have a love-hate relationship with the object. I always feel safer if I can bring the viewer back to the making of it. I try to do that in a lot of different ways, by residue, by touch, by these processes that are basic to all of our lives. . . that people might relate to in terms of process, everyday activities- bathing, eating, etc.
Series finales have that responsibility to leave you feeling good about entire series. You want to feel like the viewer closes the book satisfied. And if you strike out on the finale it skews how you feel about the entire series.
I didn't really want to do another sequel. I go to those movies, and I just sort of enjoy them like a viewer.
Art should startle the viewer into thinking about the meaning of life.
The viewer is yet another eye that is part of the compact that makes a photograph what it is.
The fear for a network is the viewer gets tired of you. Not that you lost any credibility, but they get tired of you.
I don't like reverse-angle shots - I find them very fake and very untruthful to the viewer.
If you can say something to people that's maybe a little bit insulting, but they're kind of giggling as they are hearing it, if you say something to their face without them getting mad at you, I think that's the right balance. You don't want to make it uncomfortable, especially for the viewer or the people around either. Sometimes that happens. You're watching and you're like, 'Uh, this is awkward. I don't want to look!' But, if everybody's enjoying it, I think that works.
If you're not excited about the subject, the viewer won't be either.
Please, don't use a cornice as a doorstop. At least put it somewhere where people will have to look up at it. Architectural details really ought to be displayed in the same relation to the viewer as they were originally intended.
I want the paintings to take me or the viewer out somewhere else.
Put a symbol, or language of some sort, in a painting and it will be noticed by the viewer whether or not they can read that particular language.
The modern reader (or viewer, or listener: let's include everybody) is perilously overloaded. His attention is, to use the latest lingo,'targeted' by powerful forces? Our consciousness is a staging area, a field of operations for all kinds of enterprises, which make free use of it.
I didn't intend to work on the issue of child marriage, but I felt like it was a topic that is related to a lot of the other issues, like acid attacks, self-immolation, and female genital mutilation. I wanted to continue to drive the conversation, but my overall goal is to protect girls. Photography has a way of addressing the viewer whether they want to deal with it or not, and that's why photography is such a good medium for documenting the issues that girls face.
Television is a non graded curriculum and excludes no viewer for any reason, at any time. In other words, in doing away wtih the idea of sequenece and continuity in education, television undermines the idea that sequence and continuity have anything to do with thought itself.
There's something imminent in the work, but the circle is only completed by the viewer.
The viewer brings all additional information to the image.
The context in which a photograph is seen affects the meaning the viewer draws from it.
As a viewer myself, I tend to gravitate toward projects that have a really strong voice of a strong creator.
Don't ever let the viewer settle in and get ahead of you.