Originally, at 4 x 6 inches (10 x 15cm), they looked like this:
At 7.5 x 22 (19 x 56cm), they look like this:
 |
| color smudged (unsuccessfully, I know) under this one |
 |
| forgot I wanted to "reference the frame" here |
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
economies of scale
Last year, whilst doing my almost-one-a-day projects, I did some line drawings that I liked. I wanted to try them in a much larger scale so I made some studies in a more intermediate size.
Originally, at 4 x 6 inches (10 x 15cm), they looked like this:
At 7.5 x 22 (19 x 56cm), they look like this:
I have paper that's 45 wide, so I'm going to try that next. But I think I need to clear off the dining table and devote it to this higher (or, rather, bigger) calling.
Originally, at 4 x 6 inches (10 x 15cm), they looked like this:
At 7.5 x 22 (19 x 56cm), they look like this:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
can't wait to see those 45's!
Me too!
These look great! Sure wish I could see a bigger picture.
Oooh, very cool. Absolutely love them.
Norma,
I may bring them to the guild meeting, but I may not. I think it's going to be a lively enough session without them.
Vivien,
I'm very intrigued by these. I may try them in fabric at some point.
Really intriguing! Looking forward to the 45 wide pieces.
Robyn,
Me too! And I'm almost up to clearing the table, which will not be as much of a project as I feared. (I peeked yesterday.)
Ack! Big! Fear response here!
That's why I'm creeping on it "bigger." I'm so used to either the postcard-size rectangle or the scrapbooking-size square that are ubiquitous (and iniquitous) in fiber art that other scales are both enticing and scary.
eek. Hit "publish" too fast. That s/b "creeping up on 'bigger'"
Post a Comment