Tentatively titled, Overlooking the Clouds Sea, (Fang Corners a Crow in the Backyard) 1817/2009, 2009oil on linen
7" x 5"
It's almost an exact copy of the Caspar David Friedrich painting, Le Voyageur au-dessus de la mer de nuages, translated as The Traveller over the Clouds Sea, according to the back of the souvenir card I bought in a museum store. Fog, Clouds Sea, same diff.
Seriously, it's ludicrous. The painting is 7" x 5". The pixel dimension of the original tiff is 1757 x 2466. At 100% view on the computer screen, a detailed section that is about 1 inch in real life is blown up to be the size of the whole painting. It's freaking me out, man. I can't deal with the appearance of verisimilitude.
I'm not going to post all 18, some of which you've seen, but I'm getting picky about shooting these in order to apply for a grant app. (The jpg I've posted is only at 72dpi, not the required 300-400dpi.) I know I'm over thinking this and getting ready to spin in hyper mode, but still. Am I expecting too much? Does it smell like turpentine and linseed oil yet? Will it ever?
Nevermind. Carry on. Nothing to see here. I was just hyper-analyzing pixels.
2 comments:
This painting looks great, and I think I know what you mean. There almost seems to be a blind fogginess to viewing smaller works online. I feel like I can't really see it. I want to move in and eyeball it in person, more so than with JPEGs of larger work. Larger work, you feel you get the gist pretty well. You may be wrong, but you believe you see it right.
Is it like when you can't hear someone because they are talking too loudly?What is the solution?
Thanks. I believe with this post and my comments on FB, I've confirmed my hyper-sensitive eye for detail and desire for unattainable perfection. I'm embarrassed.
Post a Comment