I scanned a squash, I wanted to photocopy it but my scanner doesn’t do that in the same way as a xerox machine does and the quality of the print isn’t brilliant. I did some still scans and somewhere it danced or rolled across the glass. Some of the images look quite nice but nothing particularly striking.
I’ve done this with quite a few of different objects, photographs and even people. It’s something I’m really interested in as a low tech form of creating work that’s easy and almost instant while still producing a physically copy (when done on a copier). It feels similar to a Polaroid picture.
When my images don’t come out so well I tend to think of the piece as a performance and not an image. I imagine a white room with a large xerox machine in the middle and a person (the artist) dressed all in black stood copying the object and the prints spilling out and the artist never checking what’s on the paper just creating until the floor is covered. I might write up the description, turn the images into a book and have the piece of writing at the beginning so it becomes a sort of fictional performance.
I could make a whole series of these books of fictional performance and copies, each with a twist to make them different from the other. The only clue that the performance never happened would be that the book is labeled fiction.
Maybe I could arrange a room and artist to do one of these performances. If I did would it take away from the image of the performance created in the mind of the viewer? It could be played as a film projected onto an enlarged copied image, or a film played through a boxy TV, or it could be a still photograph of the performance at the beginning of the book.