Friday, 27 December 2013

Painting 2D>3D>2D (Written 18-10-13)

Taking my work from 2D to 3D seemed like a very natural step for me, and is something I usually do in my practice (but more with drawings and plans than with painting). Following the crit we had, where it was suggested I think about what 3D materials my painting reminded me of, I experimented with wire, masking tape and different papers making small maquettes. I enjoyed this because it was a very quick, spontaneous process and seemed to develop very naturally.


I feel this way of working would be useful for me,  certainly it would provide me with a lot of ideas because the work is constantly eveolving and changes very rapidly. It might however be hard to decide when to stop the process, and focus on one thing to refine it.

I had not anticipated the translucency that was produced by the masking tape, which could certainly be taken forward in painting by using many thin layers of paint. It was suggested that my work has similar sensitivities in this way to that of Ian McKeever, an artist who I have looked at previously and whose work I like very much for its subtlety, exploration of light and transparent qualities. I am also drawn to McKeever's curiosity for an ambiguous solidity of form and space - I am very interested to explore this element further in my own work.

Ian McKeever - 'Day Painting', 1999


It was very interesting in this week's crit trying to guess the order in which people's work had been made... whether the drawing, or the sculpture, or the photograph came first. I was happy with the response I got to my work, and the feedback was very useful in thinking of ways forward - I am thinking about how to develop the x-ray like quality of the photographs I took of my maquette on the light box.


No comments:

Post a Comment