I am currently using digital images in my work to document something a bit like performance art. To be more specific, I have one idea in which I get someone else to live as me instead of me, and another where I follow a set of orders from someone else, freeing me from responsibility from my actions. There is no real audience, as the "performance" is just changing a routine, and so the work exists only in these images. This makes me unsure of what these images should look like.
If they are documentation of everyday things, it seems appropriate to take them in a similar way to "casual" photos (family photos, photos taken by people without too much interest in photography, etc.). I feel that this would involve paying some attention to composition, but not too much to altering what is within the frame (clearing irrelevant objects etc.), lighting (turning the light on if it is too dark seems fine, but reenacting the moment in natural light for a better photo does not), camera settings or editing.
I don't feel that the fact that the work will only exist as a set of photos is a reason in itself to ensure that the photos are "aesthetically pleasing" or that they look like "good photography." However, I am wondering if there is a need for them to be a bit more polished so that they do not give off the feeling that they were not carefully considered.
