1
AR C H IVE
ARDESIA PROJECTS
Ardesia Projects celebrates one year of activity with its first public event in the UK at the Brighton Photo Fringe by hosting two exhibitions and with this publication, representing a condensed annual of our projects. Many inspiring artists, writers and curator have so far joined our collective to contribute to our program through different approaches and inspiring ideas. International emerging and more established artists have seen their work published on our website through the difficult balance between critical essays and short reviews, offered in both Italian and English, written by our team of writers and contributors. We have also collaborated with Marta Barina, young and talented curator, during the exhibition Less Photography, More Photographic at the SP3 gallery in Treviso by organizing a series of collateral events. In this occasion we organized one workshop in which students from the art college of Treviso have been invited to challenge concepts of media language by Italian artist Filippo Patrese. Our contribution to the Brighton Photo Fringe 2016 consists in two exhibitions.Screened, curated by Benedetta Casagrande will see the work by Seà n Padraic Birnie recent winner of the Magnum Graduate Award, James William Murray, currently in exhibition at the Athens Photo Festival Photobook Exhibition and Alberto Sinigaglia with his critically acclaimed project Big Sky Hunting. Screened challenges ideas around visibility and invisibility in photography. We are also part of the BPF16 Collective Hub, exhibiting the most recent bodies of work of Dimitri D’Ippolito and Michele Amaglio. Yet, our projects are in continuous expansion. Photobooks will become an important part of our program with publication by emerging photographers. Talks and public events will also become a key part of our activity, further expanding our goal of promoting a critical debate around emerging photography.
Michele Amaglio
Screened p5
Collective Hubs p10
A Solid Matter p15
Exhibition curated by Benedetta Casagrande | James William Murray | Sean Padraic Birnie and Alberto Sinigaglia
Exhibition Michele Amaglio | Dimitri D’ippolito
Essay by Michele Amaglio Jack and Sam Carvosso | Holly Kiloh Duce | Tom Heatley
An Impossible Task p21
Photography and Postinternet Art p24
Essay by Sean Padraic Birnie James William Murray
Essay by Michele Amaglio Szilvia Bolla | Reinis Lismanis | Jure Kastelic | Scott Pattinson | Patrick Raimondi Taylor
BPF16
Opposite Seàn Padraic Birnie from the series Camera
Screened Text by Benedetta Casagrande
Images are mediations between the world and human beings. Human beings “ex-ist”, i.e. the world is not accessible to them and therefore images are needed to make it comprehensible. However, as soon as this happens, images come between the world and the human beings. They are supposed to be maps but they turn into screens: instead of representing the world, they obscure it until the human beings’ lives finally become a function of the image they create. Vilém Flusser, Towards a Philosophy of Photography
Photography traffics in illusions, but among its distortions still seems to offer a kind of contact with the world. In the act of looking at photographs, the photograph recedes, becomes transparent, a window or portal in time. What disappears in that moment is the infrastructure of photographic technology itself: for the eye that looks upon the world, it is the eye itself that cannot be seen. Yet in the persuasiveness of their detail, photographic resemblances always seem to seduce us back into a naive realism: we do not look at photographs, but through them.
For Vilém Flusser, the photograph, as the first ‘technical image’, fundamentally transformed the way in which we relate to the world. “The invention of photography constitutes a break in history that can only be understood in comparison to that other historical break constituted by the invention of linear writing.” In opposition to the traditional image, Flusser describes the technical image as an abstraction of a third order: it is an abstraction from text, which is an abstraction from the traditional image, which is in itself abstracted from the concrete world. Rather than a means
6
of representing the world, photographic technology becomes a way of constituting it. But the means by which the camera apparatus does this are not shaped by the photographer, who in Flusser’s account becomes a simple functionary of a pre-formatted programme: “The photographer’s gesture as the search for a viewpoint onto a scene takes place within the possibilities offered by the apparatus. The photographer moves within specific categories of space and time regarding the scene: proximity and distance, bird- and worm’s-eye views, frontal- and side-views, short or long exposures, etc. The Gestalt of space–time surrounding the scene is prefigured for the photographer by the categories of his camera. These categories are an a priori for him. He must ‘decide’ within them: he must press the trigger.” On one side of the lens, the appar atus of the camera and its internal, unexplored space in which reality is introjected and enclosed. On the other, the source material which results in the derivative product of the photograph. Big Sky Hunting by Alberto Sinigaglia, Untitled
B P F16
(Two Figures) by James William Murray and Camera by Seán Padraic Birnie each enter into conversation in this uncertain space, creating an inverted projection of the apparatus and its hallucinator y potential. Bringing the concealed body of the apparatus into view, ‘Wor ld’ (from Camer a) examines the interior space of the camera body to illuminate the obscurity at the heart of photographic production. The lens is removed and the device sealed from the outside world, interrupting the flow of light which puts exterior and interior in dialogue. In the sealed interior of the body,the sensor,primed for light and vision, records a landscape of noise and no signal. This results in an abstract space constructed by noise and invisibility. Yet, a certain familiarity is evoked by the fading landscape. The abstract image recalls the infinite horizons of landscapes and seascapes that inhabit our collective memory. In ‘Camera ii.’ (from Camera), the photographed lens appears as a bottomless void in which the viewer is absorbed. Looking through the body of
Opposite: SeĂ n Padraic Birnie Camera i & Camera ii Alberto Sinigaglia from the series Big Sky Hunting
8
B P F16
the camera, obscurity becomes a site of absorption and perdition, enclosing an infinite combination of possibilities -in the impenetrable night the human mind seeks familiar shapes to define an imaginary space. In a condition of semi-blindness, the mind is forced to rely on both memory and imagination to construct meaning. The allure of the unseen (and hence unknown) exacerbates the relevance of the relationship between obscurity and visibility in the dynamics of the photograph. James W. Murray’s Untitled (two figures) consists in a sculptural piece comprising two adjacent screens made out of blackout fabric, traditionally used to obscure the dark room. Untitled (two figures) solicits desire through invisibility, questioning and exploiting the paradoxes found in the etymological history of the screen. Because screen is a paradoxical word: in Skeat’s Etymological Dictionary, the word has been described as ‘that which shelters from observation, a partition’ and ‘a coarse riddle or sieve’, implying that the two main uses of the word refer to sheltering from observation and partitioning. As a sieve would retain thicker elements whilst allowing the thinner elements through, the screen serves as metaphor for both hiding and revealing. By separating elements, the screen provides the order that sometimes comes from separation, allowing the audience to focus only on that which is being revealed, momentarily silencing the unnecessary and leaving the attention uncluttered. The questions which naturally arise are simple but fundamental in our understanding of Murray’s piece and its relevance in this exhibition: who or what is being sheltered? Who is it being sheltered from? As an audience, on which side of it do we stand? And mostly: in what ways does the impossibility of vision stimulate our deepest curiosities and desires? In many ways, Murray’s piece functions as a Pandora’s box, endlessly alluring in its unveiled secrecy. Putting in play the relationships between presence and absence, visibility and invisibility, Murray highlights
the importance of these paradoxes understanding of the visual arts.
in
our
Alberto Sinigaglia’s Big Sky Hunting complements the show by “presenting a voyage at the end of representational space.” Exploring the relationship between men and space, and more specifically the urge to dominate and control such space, Big Sky Hunting confronts us with abstract, semi-scientific images sourced in his immediate surroundings. Appropriating
and manipulating various elements including original images and archival edited documents, Sinigaglia’s project exploits and comments upon the human mind’s desire to make comprehensible that which it cannot understand. “Big Sky Hunting places the emphasis on the human mind’s capacity to create and imagine that which it wants to see, or better yet, that which it desires in order to create a protective shell; a reassuring barrier inside of which that which is known, or may be known, can be controlled.” Sinigaglia’s project tenderly reminds us of the most fascinating mechanisms of our psyche; the need for dominance, control and understanding, or in other
words the need for safety. Our use of photographic media reflects our need to control and understand the world. And the language associated with photography asserts a human dominance over space: we ‘capture’ our surroundings, we ‘immortalize’ our lovers, we ‘take’ photographs as if in doing so we have removed something from the world. Overall, SCREENED delves into the maze of perception, exploring the fantastical potential of photographic media and, more importantly, the deepest ways we relate to it. In bringing together three artists who are each in their own ways engaged with questions of visibility, medium and technology, the exhibition invites the audience to fantasize, reflect and get lost within the bottomless depths of photographs. Opposite: James William Murray Untitled (Robe) This page: James William M,urray Untitled (Tho Figures)
10
AR C H IVE
Opposite Michele Amaglio from the series Jesolo Traum
Collective Hubs Ardesia Projects is hosting an exhibition at the Brighton Photo Fringe Collective Hubs at the Kings House venue, showcasing the work by two active members of the collective. Dimitri D’Ippolito and Michele Amaglio are two Italian photographers, both recently graduated from the University of Brighton. In the exhibition, their two most recent projects which consider social and economical issues of today’s society through an exploration of landscape.
Dimitri D’Ippolito’s body of work They Are Not investigates the phenomenon of money laundering in the UK, specifically in the city of London. Most of the financial businesses lead by these organisations take place in the British capital, right in the middle of the most important European financial pole. The sense of uncanny created by the obscured identity of the people portrayed allows the viewer to perceive the investigation’s arduousness and that of disentangling the subject matter.
With the body of work Jesolo Traum, Michele Amaglio investigates the visual aesthetic of the seaside resort town of Jesolo in the North Eastern coast of Italy. Hotels, fun fairs and clubs rapidly emerged in the landscape and contributed to the creation of a utopian perspective of collective optimism. Jesolo Traum represents a visual enquiry on the rapid change of aesthetics of Jesolo from the optimistic dream to the simulation of an exotic paradise.
12
AR C H IVE
This page top and opposite bottom Mchele Amaglio from the series Jesolo Traum This page bottom and opposite top Dimitri D’ippolitofrom the series They Are Not
14
AR C H IVE
Archive
Opposite Jack and Sam Carvosso from the series Casting Steel, The click of the shutter
Solid Matter Text by Michele Amaglio
The visual research of form and aesthetics has pushed photography and sculpture to a dialogue that took places since the first photographic experiments. A relationship built on common interests and similar roots. The duo Sam and Jack Carvosso, Tom Heatley and Holly Duce explore the boundaries between photography and sculpture. The visual research of form and aesthetics has pushed photography and sculpture towards a dialogue that took place since the very first photographic experiments. In the early stages of the photographic medium, it was very common for its’ pioneers to photograph statues and sculptures of religious institutions and ar t museums. This was due to the complexity of the early techniques, which had very long exposure times. French photographer Charles Negre, for instance, became one of the first to portray the gothic statues of Notre Dame de Paris whereas British photographer Roger Fenton documented the sculptures in the British Museum. In a similar way, many artists became interested in the role played by photography in the representation of sculptural work,
so that it became very common for a photographer to be invited by a sculptor to document their most recent works. Notable artists, such as Fernand Leger and Ossip Zadkine, frequently invited Hungarian photographer André Kertész to capture their work and their studios. Similarly, throughout the years, the dialogue between photography and sculpture has linked the two art forms in most of the important moments of the avant-garde art movement. From Dadaism to the postmodern era, photography and sculpture influenced each other by sharing common interests and processes. Shadows, materiality and geometries became the common ground between the two art forms
16 throughout the years as well as the starting point for the visual research of many contemporary artists. Collaborations between photography and sculpture occur more and more frequently, mostly in the form of installations. By borrowing processes belongingto one or the other art form, photography and sculpture have interwoven their interests and processes in order to investigate the fine line dividing the two. In this way, an image can support the work of a sculptor by becoming an object or by playing with forms, colours and, vice versa, a sculptor can answer the need of physicality that a photograph cannot offer. The result of this continuous exchange of interests and languages can be seen as a new hybrid form of art. A concrete dialogue between photography and sculpture takes place in the collaboration between the brothers Jack and Sam Carvosso, a photographer and a sculptor, respectively. In Casting steel, The click of the shutter (2014), the artist duo explore the relationship between the sculptural object and the photographic surface through an installation that investigates the boundaries between the two art forms. Exhibited at the Brighton Photo Fringe 2014, this work merged photography and sculpture into a unique language. The installation rests on the collaboration between brothers working with different mediums. Jack Carvosso, for instance, alternates black and white images of the incomplete sculptures made by his brother Sam with still life and natural landscapes, which unravel a reflection on photography itself, and it’s visual power. On the other hand, Sam Carvosso plays with the photograph, seen as an object. Casting steel, The click of the Shutter investigates the nexus between photography and sculpture in the representation of forms and geometries, through cultural and artistic references from past and present times. This exhibition delves into the core of both art of the other. A natural landscape becomes sculptural when its physical reproduction – its print – lies obliquely
AR C H IVE
on the walls of the installation; vice versa a piece of rock assumes photographic connotations when enclosed in a metal structure, framing the subject. The clever collaboration between the Carvosso brothers is a summary of the essential elements that constitute photography and sculpture and it presents a rich panorama of images and objects that belong to some of the most important references in art history. The collaboration between Jack and Sam Carvosso is particularly relevant because it combines the common interest of two brothers working with different mediums. In a similar manner, The Sculptors by Tom Heatley investigates even more profoundly the relationship between photography and sculpture, through collaborating with the University of Brighton’s sculpture department. This body of work is influenced by the similar interests, in terms of visual aesthetics, that photography and sculpture share. Tom Heatley describes the work as an ethnographic research, that focuses on the spaces and the objects used by the sculptors. Scissors, pliers, blocks of marble, paint and metal wires become the core of this exploration, celebrated as art objects and reproduced photographically. As an installation, The Sculptors plays with the boundaries between the two art forms: thick wooden frames celebrate the images by transforming them into objects, rested on the floor or hanging crooked from the walls. In this work, Tom Heatley shows how the photographic medium can be used as a tool of visual transformation, by highlighting new aspects of objects or places often overlooked. We decided to consider a sculptural work that borrows photographic processes. In Some Fundamentals, British artist Holly Duce plays with the sensorial element of her work by combining different materials with the visual reference of pictorial images. The materiality and the form of the objects are used cleverly to suggest a sensory perception: three blocks of wax rest on the floor of the installation whilst
apiece of rock faces a pane of glass. A sheet of glass leans on a big print of a natural, barren landscape contributing to the suggestive effect that the installation wants to produce on the viewer. In this case, the image in itself is not important – it is not a matter of what is depicted in the photograph. On the contrary, the role played by the photograph is to confer a further suggestion of sensory perception. The installation offers an overall sense of physicality, by combining the use of sculptures with images. The viewing is essential. The core of this work offers an experience to the viewer through the reflection of light on the surface of the objects and on the images, wrapped by a plastic sheet. In this scenario, the referential content of the image loses significance, becoming barer of perception rather than of indexical content.
Holly Kilo Duce from the series ‘Some Fundamentals’
18
AR C H IVE
AR C H IVE
Opposite top, Sam and Jack Carvosso Casting Steel the click of the Shutter This page Top and opposite bottom Tom Heatley from the series The Sculptors This page bottom Holly Kiloh Duce Some Fundamentals
20
James William Murray from the series Beheld.
AR C H IVE
AR C H IVE
An Impossible Task Text by Seรกn Padraic Birnie
Before her lover departs, she traces his shadow, thrown by candelight, on to the wall. Later her father, the potter Butades, will make a cast from the drawing.
In the Natural History, Pliny locates the origins of art, of the graphic and plastic arts, in the trauma of romantic loss. As a way of staving off a future loss and as a form of compensation once it has passed. The question of contact and of touching plays a determinate part in proceedings: the present lover directly casts his shadow; the young woman directly traces his shadow; her father fashions his sculpture directly from the trace. A certain connection threads through each medial layer. So art begins with the shadow of its subject, its ghost or shade, a derivative effect. Something primary and vital is lost; the work of art exists in a condition of secondarity, surrogacy, derivation. The myth establishes the question of medium, too, of the limitations that enable and disable in unequal measure: sculpture, which takes drawing as
its model; and how the shift into three dimensions from the original tracing becomes a more powerful invocation of presence. In this sculpture fulfills a promise that drawing makes but cannot honour. It becomes something you can touch. It becomes something you can hold, and thereby compensates, or for a time seems to compensate, for the inadequacy of the two-dimensional image. It replaces the shadow of the man with the shadow of the sculpture. The sculpture, as the fulfillment of this process, as a tactile thing occupying space in the world, becomes a surrogate for the lover and the lost sensuality of love. But in its fulfillment of that promise it risks a deeper betrayal: the truest likeness becomes the greatest travesty. Instead of summoning that presence,
22 it casts the absence into sharp relief. What aspired to compensate becomes a taunt. The likeness simulates presence, but in the very efficacy of its simulation throws a harsh light on the facts of distance and future-loss. Photography, in which the automatic apparatus secures a form of homological likeness unparalleled in the other depictive arts, exacerbates this logic. Every photograph is this catastrophe, as Barthes says of the picture of Lewis Payne, shortly before his execution. For the Hungarian photographer Brassaï “the question is always to find that sole translation that will be valid in another language… for all literal translation is treason.” The medium’s fidelity to surfaces enables the illusion that one might enter the picture, that the image plane hoards depth, forever just out of reach.The desires photography sets in motion (and the very desire which set photography into motion) animate the belief in that illusion (and we know it is an illusion, of course, we are not naive: nevertheless, the precision secures our belief, in spite of that knowledge), which works only at a certain distance: nose against print or screen, the image breaks
AR C H IVE
up, becomes grain or noise. Becomes a hard surface. What at first seems to put you into touch becomes at last a barrierIn photographs and partial sculptures, Beheld explores these barriers. One might go further and say that the essence of the work does not reside in the individual pieces, but in their interrelationships, and in the primary relationship Beheld supplants, that of lover and the beloved, artist and subject. The work finds its starting point and aesthetic logic in the myth of the Corinthian maid.Tease out the meanings that its title set in play: to hold and to touch, most obviously. To possess and be possessed; the eye of the beholder (and the failure of photography’s optical regime), a later addition in English to the Germanic compound. In relation to its combination of different media, the way a medium holds, or tries to hold, its subject. The term always contains this sense of potential loss: one only need hold on to something that can be taken away. Hold still – like a sculpture – for a photograph. Hold back. Contain, like a frame, or like a medium. That containment necessarily fails, and it is this failure that seems to me to be the key to the way that Beheld
works. The subject – any subject – will always exceed its form: the translation of which Brassaï speaks is always an abstraction, a reduction. There is no lossless medium. Condemned to an impossible task, the problem becomes one of doing justice to the subject, to the subject’s overflowing excess: in the interstices between its components – digital photographs on tracing paper; a sculpture in marble dust; stills from an unshown video recording the attempt to draw a perfect circle – that excess returns in spectral from: a product of spatial relationships, of incomplete processes, unfinished things. That form does not become visible or tangible, and in this way it eludes the violence of reduction. Instead it hovers in the gaps. The likeness in marble dust is from a direct mold of the subject’s face (Andre Bazin likens photograph to a death mask, molded from that face). It’s a temporary sculpture, reformed for every showing. The delicacy of the thing solicits the desire to touch, but of course to touch it would be to destroy the likeness, would dislodge its precarious shape. Like a reflection in water – touch the surface and the splash disrupts the image. In a reversal of the shift, in the Corinthian Maid myth, from the graphic image to the plastic form, the sculpture in its turn becomes the subject of a photograph, fixing that precarity in the stillness of the picture. It is a photograph of the sculpture, but not of this sculpture, the one here on the floor, but an earlier point in the series of temporary sculptures made for each showing of the work. Possibly the original sculpture, though what status accrues to an original is rather thrown into question. But in the studio now the two works, sculpture and photograph, photograph of an earlier form of the present sculpture, vie for primacy in a struggle without resolution. Perhaps that irresolution in itself is the point: this skein of mediations, from body to shadow to tracing to cast to sculpture – when the lover departs, only this tangle of shadows and shadows of shadows remains.
Oppposite James William Murray from the series Beheld.
24
AR C H IVE
Photography and Postinternet Languages Text by Michele Amaglio
The advent of new technologies and the Internet have deeply mutated the role of photography within society.An important loss of both physicality and authority are leading the photographic medium towards new interests and languages. The exhibition Less Photography, More Photographic invites the viewer to consider the value of photographic art in the digital era. The advent of the internet and of new technologies has brought important modifications to photography in response to these new influences. The huge supply of digital images and contents accessible through the internet has lead photography to mutations that call into question the value of the image itself. The work of art is now suffering the consequences of digital reproduction, quoting the well-known essay by Walter Benjamin The work of art in the age of technical reproduction (1936).
In Benjamin’s essay we find a very lucid analysis on the status of the work of art and the mutations caused by the advent of photography and cinema. The technical reproduction of these forms of art, Benjamin argues, leads to the crisis of the authority – or aura – of the work of art due to the impossibility of recognizing its original form. This debate becomes particularly relevant in today’s context when we consider the advent of the Internet and of new technologies, which have revolutionised the whole system of communication and sign. The technical reproduction turns into the digital reproduction by sensibly increasing
Reinis Lismanis from the series Solid Views
26 the possibilities of diffusion of contents produced every second and driving photography to the loss of its physicality. The majority of photographs taken every instant are reproduced through the screen of a computer or of a smartphone and only a few take a material form. Inter- net and social networks then become the main channels of dissemination. Internet also becomes a huge database that offers an incalculable amount of contents to millions of users across the world. Every form of content can find its space on the web and anybody can spread their own images. But the advent of the Internet hasn’t solely changed the diffusion of images. The internet has transformed the image itself by turning the photograph into a flux of information. The manipulation of the photo- graph, which has always existed since the early photomontages and col- lages by important artists such as Hannah Hoch and Raoul Hausmann, now takes an important role. Software such as Photoshop, 3D graphics
AR C H IVE
and digital aesthetics are more and more common. Thus if photography suffers a loss of both authority and physicality, it gains in creative freedom. Internet and the advent of digital technologies have provoked reaction from many creatives often ascribed as members of the recent movement of Post-Internet Art. The word Post-Internet was used for the first time by the artist and writer Marisa Olson in the article Lost not Found: The circulation of Images in Digita Visual Culture (2008). Olson contextualises the subsequent art movements which have been developed since the internet has gained more relevance in contemporary society. The word PostInternet echoes post-modern, in which the prefix post must be understood in a temporal sense (after the Internet)and consequentially (because of the Internet): Post hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc (after this, therefore because of it). There are many contributions to the PostInternet phenomenon belonging to varied and different responses to the issue, but all somehow connected to the advent of the Internet. Similarly to any contemporary movements, it is very complicated to provide a definition of what precisely the Post-Internet is; however, it is possible to consider the significant elements that contribute to this phenomenon. As mentioned in the previous paragraphs, the image became a flux of information constituted by the different interactions that shape the photograph before, during and after its creation. Postproduction software, such as Adobe Photoshop have opened infinite possibilities of interaction. Furthermore, once the images are uploaded on the Internet they become publicly available to millions of users that may use them for further manipulation and application. The supply of digital contents through
Jure Kastelic wipe I
Opposite. Scott Pattinsons
the Internet has lead the image to the status of readymade; in other words, the online data that is available can be considered material for further elaborations. The aesthetic of new technologies is surely a further element of interest in the creative research of many artists that debate the visual value of the virtual. New elements have been introduced with the development of new creative languages such as 3D graphics, the use of the computer for scientific purposes as a tool of analysis and new three dimensional scanning technologies. In this highly technical and empirical context, the new technologies constituted by algorithms, codes and geometric forms assume a fundamental relevance and perceptive point of view. Many artists have been experimenting with these functions on the photographic surface; investigating how the image can be transformed by the mathematical functions. The images is then distorted beyond recognition.
The new elements that have been introduced in Post Internet art can also be perceived as visual creations. There is an ever growing interest in projecting virtual reality into the material form. Artists are now investigating the sculptural value of a pixel or the relationship a 3D model could have with reality.The image trapped by the two-dimensional surface can fight to achieve a sculptural form. Photography has always followed the technological achievements and adapted to changes within society. On the other hand, the development of photographic techniques always answered the needs of the collectivity. The hectic and hyperconnected society in which we live had to be narrated by an equally rapid and instantaneous tool, which could spread an image within seconds. The transformations that have revolutionized photography in the past decades are intrinsic to that time. The new aesthetic standards have mu- tated the entire system of images, taking photography to new possibilities in terms of creativity. It is a freedom that has costed photography its physicality and authority, but nonetheless leads to new opportunities.
28
Szilvia Bolla It is what it is, yeah?
AR C H IVE
AR C H IVE
Top, Patrick Raimondi Taylor Four Photographic Machines for Mr. Rube Goldberg. Bottom, Reinis Lismanis, from the series Solid Views
Ardesia Projects is an online platform with the intent of stimulating an international debate around photography and visual arts. Founded in 2015, Ardesia Projects promotes photographic works by emerging and established artists with the purpose of becoming an international perspective on visual and contemporary arts. By offering contents in English and Italian, Ardesia also wants to bridge the gap between different creative cultures and to approach a various public to an European artistic perspective.
Ardesia Projects www.ardesiaprojects.com info@ardesiaprojects.com
Director | Editor-in-Chief Michele Amaglio
Deputy Editor Benedetta Casagrande
Authors Michele Amaglio Benedetta Casagrande Sean Padraic Birnie
Contribuiting Artists Sean Padraic Birnie Szilvia Bolla Jack and Sam Carvosso Dimitri D’ippolito Holly Kiloh Duce Tom Heatley Jure Kastelic Reinis Lismanis James William Murray Scott Pattinson
Patrick Raimondi Taylor Alberto Sinigaglia All images in this publication are the copyright © proprety of the artists. Cover Image by Tom Heatley Graphic Design Michele Amaglio
A special thank you to Valentina Arena Leone Pantaleoni Jade Marie Thomas Tom Heately Natasha Vartoukian Annalaura Palma Dario Severi Marcella Borzi Fiona Lerski Andrea Milani João Miguel Rodrigues Charlie Lindsell
Simon Sandys Theresa Elfein Francesca Tucci Matthew Broadhead Ilaria La Prova Marco Renne Reinis Lismanis Claudio Casagrande Marta Barina Ramona Guentert Valerio Torrisi Maya Nogradi Christopher Cowan Sarah Soffield Simon Frost Hilary Bowman Francesco Bianco Bob Visser Dionysis Livanis Tomaso Carboncini Eva Simontacchi Lara Ozdogan Carlotta Liberale Michele Casagrande