Collage, 4-1/2" x 5-1/2"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Things I make that are not exactly paintings
Things I make that are not exactly paintings
Hm. The larger image of this one is twice as big as the real thing. I should make it smaller so the scale is more similar.
ReplyDeleteRight now, the smaller version feels closer.
Yeah, definitely, the smaller image is much closer as far as scale. At least the feel of the scale.
ReplyDeleteIt's weird how things can take getting a little smaller, but seeing a picture enlarged is all wrong . . . hm.
ReplyDeletei think i have this before on some blog or other, but barney newman said the only way to achieve content is scale.
ReplyDeleteOh, this one is bursting with content . . .
ReplyDeleteHere's my theory about why smaller is OK, but larger is not, not just for reproductions of artwork, but for visual representations of anything:
ReplyDeleteIn life, things can appear smaller than they actually are; as we physically move away from an object it appears smaller. But, no matter how close we come to it, it can never appear larger than its actual size. So, while the eye is quite used to things appearing smaller, it is not used to them appearing larger.
I think this is part of why it is so hard to paint a human figure larger than life size and make it feel right. Not impossible -- and of course there are famous classic examples of great larger than life figures (they're mostly on ceilings or high up, though, where they'd appear smaller) -- but I think rare to pull off.
That's my theory.
I'm commenting a lot considering this is my own post. It's just that every time I look here I can't get over how wrong this one looks large and how much better the smaller one looks.
Anyway. I'll attempt to stop leaving comments in this thread unless someone else does. Attempt. Can't make any promises.
I read somewhere that the brain perceives thigs larger than the eye, whch is why photos of rabbits in your yard always look too small.
ReplyDeleteI really like this collage.It's amazing how using these materials linguistically.
ReplyDeleteYour theory sound likely, that once something is made larger than is possible irl to perceive, then our brain rebels.
...how you are using these materials linguistically.
ReplyDeleteregarding things appearing larger or smaller.
ReplyDeleteFrank Stella said that you always remember a Matisse painting bigger than it actually is.
In other word, Matisse puts an expansiveness into his work. this really interests me,
Also, Carla, can you explain how she is using elements "linguistically"? this is very interesting too, because the "semiotic" theory of art, as a conglomeration of signs with refracitng meaning in cultural contexts, caused great consternation, because it seems to reduce art to little definite fragments,
and the way I see it, it could be that way, but it doesn't have to , because what is more elusive than language?
I mean in general terms, she's creating a meaningful visual language in each one. These materials lend themselves to a more superficial decorative use, but these collages make surprizingly richer statements.
ReplyDeletetrue dat
ReplyDeleteSomeone said true dat on my blog. What more could I want?
ReplyDeleteThanks so much for all these comments, both of you. Means a lot.