Judging from appearances, Kimberley Tucker’s approach to art-making is experimental. Those of you who know me will realise that this is right down my street.Ms Tucker’s current exhibition is in Studio A, at the Bermuda Society of Arts. She has called it, ‘Flow’. There are 20 works in the exhibit; 12 being digital photographs of her experimental ink creations. The other eight works are original ink paintings.Looking back at Kimberley Tucker’s earlier exhibitions, it seems that she has consistently experimented; sometimes with various techniques or materials, at other times with different stylistic approaches. With this exhibition, she has focused on experimental processes and has used digital photography as a means of recording stages in progressive procedures. It is possible to see individual works as realistic, even in some instances as from the microscopic world, or conceivably as abstract. Take your choice, or for that matter, see them as all of the above. In two cases, she has entitled them as, ‘Micro I’ and ‘Micro II’. That should be an indication of how the artist saw those particular pieces.Titles are useful and I see ‘Flow’ as indicative of the processes Ms Tucker has used in making her creations. I noticed, however, that back in 2010, her exhibition was called, ‘Fluidity’. In this year’s exhibition, she is using fluids (inks), but observing how they flow together, sometimes mingling, at other times dispersing or repelling and so on. It also seems that the artist has sometimes interrupted the flow by various means that I have not yet been able to fathom, yet they each left some kind of trace as evidence of the process.I am also interested in her choice of titles for her individual works and it seems that the configurations created by the flowing fluids, suggests formations seen in nature, scenery etc, hence the titles. Consider a few: ‘River’, ‘Routes’, ‘Coastline’, ‘Rift’ and so on.Titles are useful, especially for someone such as myself; in reviewing an exhibition, it is helpful to be able to refer my readers to particular works and the most efficient way is by means of a numbered title in a catalogue. I imagine that for the viewing public, it is also practical to be able to refer someone to a particular work by the same means. Calling a work ‘Untitled’ is usually useless. Thank you Ms Tucker for using titles.There is a possible danger in using titles, however. It can fix an understanding in a viewer’s mind that prevents or hinders the observer from bringing to the work, his or her own experiences and interpretations.In order to prevent that from happening, one possibility is to use titles in a more oblique manner. This allows the viewer to be able to identify the work by title without seeing the work as fixed in any particular way.One way to do this is to use another language or some obscure word of some kind. What about inventing a word or words for the title?The exhibition continues through September 25.