Home Member Services Content Areas Tools Info Center WC Partners Shop Help
Search for:

Welcome to the WetCanvas forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit our help center.

Go Back   WetCanvas > The Learning Center > Composition and Design
User Name
Register Mark Forums Read

Salute to our Partners
WC! Sponsors

Our Sponsors
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16   Report Bad Post  
Old 07-16-2018, 09:19 PM
claude j greengrass's Avatar
claude j greengrass claude j greengrass is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,430
Re: Addicted to making large-scale art?

I started with 1/4 sheet, 15x11 paintings at that was the size my first tutor used. After about 130 or so of these I started painting 1/2 sheet 22x15 a very occasionally a full sheet 22x30. I stuck with 1/2 for the past 7 or 8 years but a new house demanded a larger than full sheet painting so I purchased 2 rolls of 140# Saunders-Waterford: about 54 inches x 33 feet. I built two 42x60 inch cradles from thin ply and light framing to pre-stretch this paper over.

A full sheet can take me a week to paint. These are almost 4x that size. I struggled with a 2 inch flat. Far too small but somehow I managed the first which is now hanging in our "great" room. The second is still a WIP but with the addition of a 1 inch round brush, I'm managing.

I'm already planning a couple of 1/2 sheets and a return to my comfortable size paintings.
It is only on a basis of knowledge that we can become free to compose naturally. -- Bernard Dunstan
Reply With Quote
  #17   Report Bad Post  
Old 07-27-2018, 12:08 AM
Colorful Easel's Avatar
Colorful Easel Colorful Easel is offline
Senior Member
Land of Stormy Clouds
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 112
Hails from United States
Re: Addicted to making large-scale art?

I had a few college professors insist that 18 inches by 24 inches was the smallest painting size you can go in “the real world” but the biggest you can put into a portfolio. So, I only paint my serious art 18x24” and have fun with my ‘hot-cake’ paintings that are smaller, and easily mailed to people when they want them. 😁
Reply With Quote
  #18   Report Bad Post  
Old 08-03-2018, 04:58 PM
Harold Roth Harold Roth is offline
Pawtucket, RI
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,617
Hails from United States
Re: Addicted to making large-scale art?

I was surprised on a trip to the Boston Museum of Fine Art to see that a Bierstadt painting I really like ("Storm Over the Rockies"???) was just average size, not huge. But I myself love big paintings, and I have gradually been edging my way up. I painted 18 x 24" for years but now doing 24 x 24" and have some 40 x 40" canvases waiting. But the thing is for me, an issue is essential tremor due to age. It is MUCH easier to deal with that on a large support than on a small one.
Reply With Quote
  #19   Report Bad Post  
Old 08-05-2018, 09:28 AM
stlukesguild's Avatar
stlukesguild stlukesguild is online now
A WC! Legend
A large urban setting in the Mid-West
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 11,401
Hails from United States
Re: Addicted to making large-scale art?

My second year in art school I was required to make a painting in which no side could be shorter than 48”... 48” square at the smallest. Up until that point I had painted a good many watercolors and some oils... most of which measured 8x12” on average. For the required big painting I stretched a canvas that was 48”x96” or 4x8 feet. The experience was something wonderful. Where I had Long focused on the smallest details drawing from the fingers, I was now drawing gesturally from the shoulders. I never looked back. With the exception of a period making small 8.5x11” collages due in part to a loss of studio space, I have almost always worked large.

My current mixed media paintings measure a standard 46x80” tall. I was attracted to the big vertical format used by Klimt, Velazquez, and others which allow me to paint the full figure... head to toe... life scale. The scale was also dictated by the paper support I have to work with at 48” wide.

As others have suggested, scale in no way equates to quality. Some of the finest paintings by Vermeer, Van Eyck, the Limbourg Brothers, Manet, Degas, etc... are tiny gems. Scale does impact how we experience a work. A large painting is more theatrical and imposes itself upon our physical being. A smaller work is more intimate... and can be a magical window that we peer into.

Things to consider when determining your choice of scale include cost (bigger canvas/paper, more paint, etc... all means more $), your working space (I have a large studio in an old commercial factory/warehouse building), transportation (how wide of a painting can you fit in your vehicle before needing to rent a U-Haul? If you are selling, what scale will the galleries accept and what sells? If you sell across the country or overseas large paintings will require special packaging and larger shipping costs. And then there’s storage; do you have room for storing large paintings? And what about time? Big paintings generally take more time to complete... which adds to the cost you must charge and how easy it will be to sell work on this scale and price. You should also consider the subject matter and how different scales impact how the audience experiences these. Degas worked quite small in his pastels. Many critics and viewers have spoken of the voyeuristic nature of his nudes... the small scale forces the viewer into getting close... as if peering into the private intimate settings at these bathers. Rubens’ large life-sized nude portrait of his second wife... and my life-scale nudes are more aggressive or confrontational in that the subject in the painting and the viewer are on equal ground, as it were.

If you are unsure of what scale you SHOULD be working on, explore a variety of scales and determine which is right for you. What are you comfortable with. Can you realistically control a vast area? Which scale do you find best achieves what you like in your work? And remember, you are always able to employ a range of scale. Even an artist like Rubens, known for his big theatrical canvases, painted some of his finest works... including portraits of his family... on a far more intimate scale. Explore a range of sizes just as you might explore a range of styles or manner of painting... especially early on.

I would question the suggestion that you can be a bit more lax with composition on a large scale. I’ve found the opposite to be true. In order to organize a larger area I need to pay more attention to compositional elements. On the other hand, I find I be a good bit looser with handling.
"Beauty is truth, truth beauty—that is all ye know on earth and all ye need to know." - John Keats
"Modern art is what happens when painters stop looking at girls and persuade themselves that they have a better idea."- John Ciardi
Reply With Quote
  #20   Report Bad Post  
Old 08-12-2018, 07:49 AM
Merriweather's Avatar
Merriweather Merriweather is offline
Adelaide area South Australia
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 1,180
Hails from Australia
Re: Addicted to making large-scale art?

I have to be honest and say, for me.. learning to paint as I am, reminds me of learning to write...
Generally, when one learns to write, they write big. and I find myself wanting to paint big..
because 'small' is tight and tight needs to look good.
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:00 PM.

© 2014 F+W All rights reserved.