Generally, I find the things artists say about their shows to be less than useful. It seems to me that the work either stands up or not, and no amount of words will rescue a bad show nor will they ruin a good one. But, those who are much smarter than I tell me I should include some biographical information and a word or two about the show. If you find the information to be useless feel free to move on to the catalogue -- it is far more telling
I was at one time a painter. I find myself inadvertently referring to my photographs as paintings even though it has been almost twenty years since Iíve painted seriously. When I went to college, I went to study painting and art history and, through an elective, discovered ceramics. With clay I found a touchstone particularly in low fire white clay bodies and various oxidizing and oxygen reduced (Ra ku) glazes. I have always found a severe beauty in the balance of the material, and the process when filtered through my personal vision. In other words when my vision or idea was good and I chose the proper materials and worked the process correctly wonderful things happened.
I see film and photographic paper as a material to achieve an end. The process of choosing a film, paper, and type of film processing that will best fulfill the requirements of the subject and my vision are an extremely natural way for me to create art. I could not care less about the politics of Fuji v. Kodak or digital v. traditional photography. Each process has a place as do all materials that can be successfully utilized. I had a ceramics teacher once say that there was no such thing as a bad glaze only bad applications. This as much as anything addresses my approach to photographic materials