At this point I’m collecting more photographs than I can process. Which sounds like a good problem to have, but it becomes messy very quickly. A camera roll full of “interesting moments” is not research yet. It only turns into research once the material becomes searchable, comparable, and usable for decisions.
So this week I started building a proper archive system for my everyday installation photographs.
Right now, my main goal is clarity. I need to be able to find images again without relying on memory. I also want to be able to see patterns: what types of installations I notice most, which materials repeat, and how the city keeps producing similar accidental compositions.
My structure:
Each installation gets a folder name that includes date + city + a short description. Inside that folder I keep the raw photo(s), plus one selected version I consider “final” for now.
On top of that, I started tagging my images with a few recurring categories.
For example:
- Beverages (coffee/beer)
- cardboard
- repair
- furniture
- temporary construction
- staged?
This immediately made my collection feel less like a random moodboard and more like a research archive. Because once the images are tagged, I can compare them across time and location. I can see how often certain object types appear. And I can start asking better questions: Why do I notice these moments? What do they have in common visually? What kind of “order” keeps showing up?
The archive also helps me with selection. Instead of choosing images based on mood, I can choose them based on criteria. I can group them. I can build sequences. And I can start thinking about the final format (book, exhibition) in a more structured way.
I’m realising that archiving is not a boring side-task. It’s actually part of the design work. The archive is the foundation for everything I will do later: writing, analysis and the final output.
