Small Pox – and currently I’m working on a variant that shows more of the virus situated in the context of the host environment…and wondering whether I ought to be thinking of each image in this way rather than mixing the two up in the manner I have to date.  Of course this goes to the very heart of this project…namely am I prepared to simply use these core images as a jumping off point for what are essentially non-representational pictures or do I wish to have that referent visible as it were in the finally presented work?  This in itself is yet another question as in the first instance these are things that many potential audience members wouldn’t recognise, secondly they are only recognisable from the images that the electron microscope reveals (we cannot ‘see’ these things directly) and thirdly my rather rough and ready ‘translations’ (that include wholesale mucking about with colour – that in itself is an arbitrary decision of their original creators) inevitably lose something in the process.

Do I need to resolve these issues at all?  Does it matter to anyone other than me…perhaps more importantly will it make any difference to the outcome of the exhibition that I’m aiming towards.  I envisage some 16 pictures comprising the display on the long wall of the gallery – 8 circular and 8 ovals – arranged in a irregular formation.  So a further consideration is the way in which the group will hang together and what the look may be.  And maybe that brings me back to my initial question here.  Perhaps the idea of either the single or isolated group of each virus (exemplified by the Small Pox above or say the HIV canvas that I’ve made) ought to be contained within the circles and the virus within context (such as the Marburg canvas) ought to be ‘squashed’ onto the ovals.  One to ponder…for only a day or two though…as the first of the new aluminium supports is now primed and ready to go in the week ahead!