Yes, it’s a weakness of mine. I don’t much like looking at photographs in a museum. Never have. I find the onlookers way more interesting. I don’t feel the same about paintings. I love to sit in front of painting and study the composition, or coloring, or paint strokes etc. I usually know something about the painters life before even entering the room. I have a sort of reference for painters that doesn’t and never has carried over to photographers (with a few exceptions, HCB, Levitt, Walker Evans, Ansel (more as a teacher), Andreas Feininger was a revered figure. Photographers who put their lives at stake to smuggle out pictures of what was going on in WWII Germany….
But these days when I go to a museum, I try to make something that reflects the atmosphere of the work there. In the multiverse theory, there are at least an infinite number of universes. Picture each one as a bubble that was created during the big bang. To do pictures like this, simple if you don’t give a damn about making them perfectly reasonable photoshop mergers. And I don’t care. It’s find the subject that’s the big deal and hoping they’ll make enough moves to create your singularity. I don’t remember who the photographer was (I mean the one on the wall) but someone with half a memory can tell you it was a super famous guy. I could also zoom in on the brochure in his pocket but who really cares. This was shot from the corner of a bench, and each time he moved, I changed the angle of the camera to be perpendicular to him.