Yes and no.
I am not sure I had the type of drawings in my store that suited developing
repeat designs, which is why I tried out a design process on a picture of a
rusty metal surface which became the stencil design. This worked well, and the
negative images from the cut-outs from the stencil were even better, they were
organic, fresh and felt quite balanced in the compositions I made.
Which fabrics did you choose? What
particular qualities appealed to you?
When printing
smooth surfaces work best. They allow the printing block, equipment or tool to
leave defined marks, whereas heavier textured fabrics take print more loosely.
That is also the case for painted fabrics when you have to pin down the surface
before painting. I liked the shiny acetate for taking very fine detail, and its
shiny surface was useful for reflecting light through the matt paint used in
printing. If printing on pre-printed fabric I think you have to select a design
very carefully to make sure the contrast does not clash and create an
imbalance.
Is the scale of marks and shapes on
your samples appropriate to the fabric? Would any of your ideas work better on
a different type of fabric, for example, sheer, textured, heavyweight? Why?
Printing and
painting on smaller samples seems to be just the first step, it does not always
give a good impression of what a run of repeats for example would look and feel
like if planned for use. I re-discovered monoprinting and this does not allow
for repeats and tried it on different surfaces, a very light, almost translucent
cotton, heavier cottons, a woven wool, the lighter (but not the lightest)
cottons (and probably a firmly woven linen) were best suited for this.
The prints
using foam blocks rendered only low reliefs so were best suited for very smooth
fabrics, while painting on fabric can be done on a variety of weights. I like
the calligraphic effect of painting with a dark colour, letting the brush
almost dance over the surface like I did for the red silk samples. This worked
well on lighter fabrics.
Do the marks and shapes seem well
placed, too crowded or too far apart? Were you aware of the negative shapes
that were forming in between the positive shapes?
In the
stencil marks the negative spaces were a bit too far spaced out. It was printed
on a white cotton and so I felt something was missing and wanted to fill the
white space with something, such as stitching. I have to admit I have not been
looking at the negative spaces too much, although some of the better monoprints
had an interesting balance between the location of marks and the areas that
only reflected areas of dye, but this is not what is being asked for here.
There was
more use of negative space in the large sample where I intentionally discharged
some of the background fabric so that the varying shades would show through (negative)
areas where I did not apply dye on the plate.
What elements are contrasting and
what elements are harmonising in each sample? Is there a balance between the
two that produces an interesting tension?
The design
elements of softness (eg in stamping with foam, rolls of yarn, soft paper)
contrasts with the stamps made of rubbers, lines painted or dragged with
pointed tools. There are contrasts in colour - eg black lines on red, use of
complementary colours and between coloured prints and black backgrounds.
Harmony is
more achievable by using similar shapes such as round forms (in one print using
different round tools such as toilet rolls and wine bottle corks), or similar dynamic
lines (such as swirling lines in the red silk painting).
The sampling
of the smaller work also definitely prepared this work, although I did not
recreate any earlier designs. The smaller monoprints, the stamping, the painted
bonding material all provided a bit of learning of how the prints would work.
Do the shapes and marks in your
single unit sample relate well to the size and shape of the fabric? Do they
make an interesting composition on this larger scale?
Yes, as I
planned a seascape I placed the sea and sky on each half of the sample with a
horizon line cutting through them. I wanted the image to fill the whole of the
fabric space which is rectangular. Although I did consider whether I should
make the sky the feature as I had done in a photograph. The marks were free and loose to evoke ideas of clouds and waves, and I think this worked well. In the final sample I am quite satisfied with the sky. I have looked at it close, and thought maybe I should have sewn onto the sky section, but no, I left the print as it stands. The marks are painterly, but not painted directly onto the fabric ground. It might be thought that this could have been painted instead of printed – and would it have made much difference? I am not sure; I used the roller to create direction in the paint-dye, I scraped at the dye, dotted with a brush and then lay the fabric onto this. I think it gives a particular textiley surface rather than a painted one.
How successful do you think your larger sample is? Do you like the design? Have you recreated or extended your ideas from the smaller samples so that there is a visible development between the two?
I am glad I looked at Barbara Rae’s work for this one to take in a sense of mark making in a large way. I like the blues and greens, the sea and sky – the motif retains enough of a sensation of the air I felt over the summer by the sea.
The
sampling of the smaller work also definitely prepared this work, although I did
not recreate any earlier designs. The smaller monoprints, the stamping, the
painted bonding material all provided a bit of learning of how the prints would
work
No comments:
Post a Comment