View Full Version : W/C - Good=Large?

10-06-2000, 05:26 PM
Just received the brochure of the Florida Watercolor Society show. I couldn't help but note that most of the paintings were HUGE! That observation makes me wonder if smaller paintings were entered at all, and if they were, were they judged inferior just because they were smaller?
There have been other shows I have been to that, coincidentally, the winning paintings were 99% very large. Is this a trend one should note before entering shows, do you think?
Most of the paintings were quite beautiful, I might add. Brownie/FL

10-06-2000, 11:49 PM
i was talking with a w/c artist recently at an art show who had several full sheet paintings on display. I told her that I didn't think I was good enough yet to do that large a painting. Her response was: "its just as easy to do a full sheet than it is to a smaller painting if not easier". I have tried several larger paintings ( I used to do only 1/4 sheet) and think she may be right! Dennis

10-07-2000, 07:48 AM
Hi Brownie.. Interesting question - and I wonder if the fact that larger paintings often demand larger prices isn't behind it all? Framing can be so expensive, and for me that plays a part too.
I just finished a full sheet painting and it is only the 4th one that large in all my years of painting...partly because of space restrictions but also because of framing costs. It goes faster for me though - and seems easier to be "painterly" .. as they say. http://www.wetcanvas.com/ubb/smile.gif Carol

10-07-2000, 02:01 PM
I have noticed that trend to in juried shows. It is a shame that smaller pieces well rendered and detailed in some delightful styles are pushed to the wayside. Maybe there should be more than one category for watercolors, so that the more detailed oriented will be viewed amongst other paintings along those lines.


10-07-2000, 08:56 PM
Interesting observations about size of watercolor paintings. I love to work on large canvases...so watercolor in smaller sizes never appealed to me. When I saw Annette Bush's works displayed...I was in awe of the size of some of the paintings. I didn't even know that they made large sizes of paper.

I think the trend in shows is to look for the untraditional (is that a good word?). The past two shows I've entered and was passed over! accepted no traditional landscapes...and the last show had no florals accepted. I think judges are swayed by one anothers choices at shows and try to outdo one another in seeking the "most creative or original" works. This often leaves the traditional artist who does beautiful work with a painting in the back room unaccepted....and the 'avant garde' work hanging in the show.

And yes, I attended both shows to view the selected works. The first show I knew immediately why my work would not fit...no works were accepted unless they were pastel or watercolor. In the second show, I was told that my painting made it to the last cut, but the judge did not feel my figures were acceptable. I could accept that.

Well, I did get off the topic somewhat...but I think it all fits!

10-07-2000, 09:54 PM
Can not imagine your figures not being "acceptable" Carly...but go figure eh? Have you a picture of it you can post?

Some artists buy the watercolor rolls of 300 and 140# paper. The 300 is hard to cut and takes 2 people to do it..but both rolls give you bigger paper ( can't remember off hand the exact measurements)... http://www.wetcanvas.com/ubb/smile.gif Carol

10-07-2000, 11:53 PM
I have enjoyed the responses to my observation here, thanks.
If nothing else, the drift of the topic brings up one thing I believe is true:
A judge is just a person who cannot be objective because it impossible. What do you think?
Going to shows is good for one's ego! We all see works which we admire and totally blow us away. Then, in the very same juried show, there are many clunkers that we wouldn't hang in the outhouse! <G>