the aesthetics of scale

[Guest ford hallam]

It occured to me as I was typing the title to this thread that it actually is long overdue. We're all apparently involved in "small scale carving" and yet we have not had any meaningful nor concerted discussion on exactly why we work at this scale.

 

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

[Phil White]

Ford,

 

I was just considering this ussue the other day, while finishing a "heroic scale" portrait sculpture in bronze. As I was cutting out and filling imperfections in the bronze after casting, I was thinking about the tool marks left behind, the imperfections in the bronze, and and how they would ruin a small piece, but they seemed insignificant on this scale. They even add a sort of character. In fact, it is a commonly used technique in sculpture to rough up a large flat surface to make it appear flat from a distance, and not disappear. Although this is sometimes done on smaller pieces, Japanese sword fittings for example, it is quite different and needs to be much more perfect to carry it off. I was also considering how the slightly larger than life size seemed to suit the subject better than if she were done smaller. It gave her more of a presence. Another sculptor friend of mine also made this comment. I wondered if it would be even possible to achieve an effective portrait sculpture in miniature.

 

I enjoy working in a smaller scale, when I can, because it allows me to concentrate completely on the simplicity of a design, for a shorter period of time. Many of the pieces that I work on can take hundreds of hours to complete, and you end up feeling like a slave to them part way through. This feeling isn't always there, and disappears part way through, but it can make things tough-going sometimes. With small work, I never have that feeling.

 

Regarding technique, to me it is something like the the process of acting, once described by the late Spencer Tracy, as "nice work, as long as you don't get caught". The over use of technique, or the lack thereof can be distracting.

 

Phil

[Guest ford hallam]

Hi Phil,

 

thanks for taking the time to comment, seems like this thread won't elicit any more comment though . Pity really.

 

Anyway, here's a little portrait bust carved by Conrad Meit, circa 1510. It's only 10cm high!

 

 

 

regards, Ford

[wunderlich]

Hi all,

 

I suppose we all think we are working on a small scale. But compared with some russians we are into monumental arts. Ha ha.

 

Vladimir Anisskin - Microminiatures

 

 

Hope you are enjoying this.

 

Karl

[Mark Strom]

Ford,

Hate to see someone walk away disappointed. As I am new to carving small and small for me is 8" x 10" for relief and 10" to 12" for sculpture. The next set of relief work will be 5" x 8". I have been reluctant to post on some topics due to this fact of scale as it relates to my work compared to others.

 

In my early years I carved large to draw attention, due to wrong tool choices, an inflated ego and it was easier. As I grew older, matured and was humbled by life, my work became smaller...of course more tools helped also. Now I have started carving smaller for my own benefit. Most of the work is experimental and is not made for either display or sale. There are so many ideas and techniques I want to try and so little time that it only made sense to work on a smaller scale to work faster. Of course this probably does not make sense to some of you who spend hour upon hour carving intricate or technically demanding work. Most of my small pieces only take a couple of hours to carve and another couple hours to refine. This refinement is done by keeping the work around and looking at it occasionally and touching up or changing things as I notice them.

 

What I have found in my recent experiments is as follows. Composition is more important due to the viewers focus being narrowed. Movement or compositional flow is critical. Individual tool cuts convey a great deal more in the finishing stages so each cut has to have been thought out and executed with precision. The direction of the cuts, depth of cut and tool choice all become integral to the design and to the expression. I try to keep my tool marks as I feel that it is a more honest approach. Bad carving can be hidden and repaired through sanding. Now I am not making a judgement on anyone's

work here, this is more of a personal challenge that keeps me from getting lazy. There are occasions when I do sand.

 

One of the wonders that I have found and am beginning to revel in is the expression. Working in this scale the expression is so much easier to attain. When I say this I mean either directly or through suggestion. In large work the expression, especially in faces, it has to be just that, in your face. Individual tool cuts can make or break an expression or carving. Things that gave me trouble on a larger scale are amazing easy on a smaller scale. I think that this is a matter of focus. I don't see anything behind the carving such as a wall of pictures or wood tones from other woods in the studio. Small carvings allow me to shut out all the visual distractions and I can "see" the work more clearly.

 

I do not think that I will ever work much smaller than the above dimensions as I would not want to change all of my markets and marketing processes. Having said that I will say that there is a satisfaction and pleasure derived from these pieces not received from the larger work. The work is more challenging. There is also the relatively immediate gratification compared to the large works. Like Phil, sometimes I have become the slave to the work and it can become difficult. Small work can be done on the side to alleviate that tension.

 

The final point to me is that it pushes me, challenges me to be more focused with the carving from the second the idea is conceived through to the completion. I can push myself and the work and if it fails...my loss is a few hours and a couple dollars worth of wood. As for the limitations of working small...from the work I have seen on this forum they seem to be few in number limited more by tools than by craftsmanship or materials.

 

Mark

[Karl Carvalho]

Aloha

 

Years ago, while running a lab research shop, I faced labor budget cuts. Checking with other shops, I found that they relied on "student helpers" (that's how I started) to fill in. Unfortunately, the electrical and mechanical engineering students that they hired turned out to be near useless. Too much book learning, not enough practical. So, on a serendipitous turn of events, I hired Art undergrads. They turned out to be the most flexible, innovative and productive people that I have had the pleasure of working with. Think about it; they were like roaches - you could "step on them", overwork them, criticize them ... and they always came back for more. All they asked from me was a small wage and access to the equipment for their projects. With access to all the gear and materials that the shop contained, expectations were high that they would do well in the annual Undergrad Art Exhibition. Briefly, Mark did a pneumatically-driven, internal combustion engine model with machined and sculpted skeletal parts of metal replacing components like connecting rods. It was cool.

 

When the juried results were announced, it turned out that none of my crew even got an honorable mention. So I asked them what gives. Their answer:

"There's a saying in the Art Dept. If you can't make it good, make it BIG. If you can't make it BIG, make it ***SHINY***. If you can't make it Shiny, make it COLORFUL. So if you see something that is BIG, SHINY and COLORFUL... get ready to hurl!"

 

Willard Wigan

 

KC

[Andrew]

In regards to this topic I find that small was the way I started b.c the availability of raw material.

Now that I have larger pieces to work with I have been taking on larger and larger scales.

 

To me doing something larger is a bigger challenge b.c in affect I am making something that is equivalent to several small pieces. It has been a mental challenge for me to accept the time investment necessary with a large project.

 

I have noticed that when the general public see my larger pieces they are more impressed with them.

Tying into Karl's theme, in my experience it seems that people with an uneducated eye (in the techniques of carving anyways) seem to gravitate to larger pieces.

When I look at carvings though, the smaller, more refined pieces wow me. But that is due to the fact that I have tried to work in this scale and am humbled by the obvious talent in others that I do not yet possess.

[Fred E. Zweig]

Ford,

 

The need for me to work on a small scale is purely selfish. I like the ability to hold what I make in the palm of my hand. When working large it is difficult to put in the detail I seek over such a large surface. Don't get me wrong, I like working on a larger scale as well and it requires a different mindset. There is nothing like working on the small scale and to know that you are creating a story and world within these short boundries.

 

Hope this makes sense.

Fred

[Kitty Corcoran]

I think people who aren't familiar with art in general go for those big, flashy and/or colorful pieces. The more time a person spends looking at art works, the more detail becomes visible to them. There can come a point when things start to snowball for a person and the more they look the more interesting everything is. I think it's like that with everything.

 

When it comes to working small, right now I'm trying something sort of parallel to that. I am working on something simple now and a little larger than the size I think I want ultimately to work in. My idea is to get smaller in increments, adding detail as I get more proficient at carving.

 

Kitty

[magnus homestead]

Glad you are having some responses here Ford. It is very interesting to hear what different members think and feel in this way.

 

For me, I started working small as a child before I had ever thought about it - chess pieces, fishing plugs and such - graduated to antler pot pipes carved while camping - then as an adult choosing to become an artist, I bumped into a job as a jade carver for a time - carving jade requires abrasive wheels and such and so the scale is generally quite small. Practicality led me to becoming a jeweler where the reality of the work is seen at 10X magnification. So when I branched out into making objects, they were done with the tools and methods I had and were thus miniature.

I held the belief for a number of years that sculpture would have to be fairly large to have much impact or audience. It was when I saw the super realistic polychrome lizards etc. of Cornell's that I realized the potential of miniature carvings for blowing the mind of an observer. We shall see in the years to come what I can do with this art of miniature sculpture.

 

One thing about these works on the micro scale is how personal they are to the audience - introverted by nature - appreciated by only one human at a time - perhaps passed around in a group, but taken in only by careful examination by an individual. I feel a tremendous appeal and potential in this.

 

When designing a large scale or architectural work, the intent must be something quite different as you are then speaking to the potential of a group. I would definately like to try a huge piece somtime.

 

Enough rambling - thanks Ford for this interesting topic.

 

Blessings,

Magnus

[Phil White]

I too like the concept of a sculpture that is meant to be held to experience it, and can only be really appreciated by one person at a time. A much more intimate experience.

 

Regarding Magnus's comment "When designing a large scale or architectural work, the intent must be something quite different as you are then speaking to the potential of a group."

 

Architectural sculpture is quite a different concept altogether, and very challenging. Since it is meant to be SEEN from a distance, and not blend into the background, the approach is to over emphasize lines, and deepen cuts to create shadow. The creation of shadows is proportionally important to the distance of viewing. Many pieces, such as grotesques that are high up on buildings, look perfectly realistic and sensitively carved from the ground, but when viewed up close, they tend to be quite distorted, often with rough tool marks left on the surface.

 

Phil

[Leon]

I told my students, graphic design, always that size matters.

You can't put the exact same logo on a building AND on a stamp. The proportions, 'the white', should always be tuned to the way we look at it. (The fact that it is almost never done anymore is probably because a computer doesn't know that!)

 

Like Phil I like small audiences too.

 

Greetings, Leon