^5...Ah, I'd checked the photos out yesterday.
To be brutally honest, if I were to see the photos 'standalone' (without whatever 'artistic story' they put together) that is, my comments would be no less than, "Erm... Ok. Nice snaps."
I thought photography was to hit an objective whereby photos tell a story by themselves, where viewers see the photos and are able to draw their own conclusion and not thru a specific story whatsoever?
Can't help but notice that inanimate shots of inanimate objects with shallow DOF like those are 'in the vogue' of late when simply just standalone, they probably held no meaning to it.
As for drawing attention, these artists probably got it... more than what they'd expected for. Including negative ones. Also, it made me wonder abt the word 'artist' in Singapore. An artist is one that invites controversy unintentionally (by way of interpretation) or do they initiate controversy thru their works (put nastily - "Attention seeking")? Which goes?
Probably IMO, "Photos reflecting the sights of a Schizopheric", is just another tagline to make ppl see the photos. I personally dun see hw the photos truly reflect the sights of a Schizopheric to be honest.
Ok. Shoot me guys.