This is pretty good.
Strong compositions, if drawn from Ming's relatively narrow range. Which might be a strength? It makes the portfolio cohesive. Strong figure to ground relationships throughout. Nice uses of repeated shapes here and there.
More importantly, there's an actual idea, reasonably well rendered. The portfolio is on point and strong. It's got enough variety to be hold your interest, but every picture contributes and supports the theme.
The only really significant thing Ming could do is drop most of the text. The titles are terrible and distracting, and he doesn't need to explain the theme.
Now, if he didn't explain the idea, the theme, we'd still get it. Perhaps not quite in the same way, but wouldn't that be a good thing, rather than a bad thing?
I find the idea that the viewer gets to find something personal in the work very appealing. I never caption or write statements. You get a portfolio title, which is likely to be suggestive, and that's it. I admit to being on the laconic end of the spectrum, both philosophically and practically.
No comments:
Post a Comment