There has been a lot of attention paid to the technical aspects and Leon has pointed out some of the dangers of getting too caught up with purely technical matters. Doug and Karl touched on some of those aspects of minature work which may be unique to this genre too. The need for precision, the role of marks, deliberate or as a result of a lack of skill. Previously, I asked about what you do to develop your technique to enable you to express what you need to.
For myself, and here I agree with what Doug and Karl said on the matter, I feel that generally, working at this small scale a certain degree of precision is vital but that the technical expression should never overide the more subtle aesthetic expression of a piece. Of course, this is most difficult with processes that are more technical, but for me that is part of the joy. This subversion of cold technique to the point that it becomes invisible.
At the moment I'm finding that as I am able to work in an ever more refined way I have to be all the more alert to the possibility that the work loses something of it's humanity. By which I mean that it becomes too perfect and thereby sterile. I have to develop my technique to the point that the technical process itself becomes my mode of expression and not just a process to achieve a predictable effect. (I hope the distincion is clear there, I was wondering myself!
We strive for expression and while we have admitted that technique in itself can have some value in this regard we know that ultimately our work must speak beyond those aspects that we can measure.
So, before I ramble on too long, what do you do, and how do you go about making the most of working at a small scale?. Why do you choose to work so small, what does it give you that working big does'nt? Are you conscious of the limitations and advantages inherent in minature work?
I look forward to hearing your thoughts and I hope this exploration will be of particular help to those of you who may be new to this path.
Namaste, Ford

Help






