no i wouldn't do it.
Small objects in simple locations make very boring and bad remote viewing targets.
plus knowing its an object in your room cuts out millions of possible targets it could be - hence i am front loaded with information which is detracting and it makes it NOT classable as remote viewing as one is not blind to the target.
Testing and experimentation showed that real targets with change are best. Targets like a spoon on a table in the bigger scale of the universe just don't hold much attention to a remote viewer. things that are good are:
past, present, future events
big structures, locations, things
locations, people and objects
movement, energy, sensory info
ie. jfk assasination, d-day, collider test, jesus, the moon, Eiffel tower, golden gate bridge, Mt Rushmore
A remote viewing for me takes about 2 hrs:
3o mins cooldown - meditation.
1+ hr remote viewing
30 mins scanning the pages 15-25 of them
30 mins writing a summary of the data.
It can be draining - although after all these years not very much for me - just need a coffee to keep me going
remote viewing is the wrong name for this - really its like remote sensing or knowing. I rarely get images, i just know what is right for the target - its a feeling. I can and do ask myself questions tho and get answer, like:
if i taste the target what does it taste like?
if i move about it what does it look like?
what colour is it?
what does it smell like?
by doing this over and over you build a picture 'with data' of the target.
Sketching also helps.
daz