Small Works

Recently I was given advice by Hank Willis Thomas to make my work bigger.  I have been advised to do this before by both my peers and my professors but have ignored the advice.  It isn’t that I am opposed to working big. When I was working more as a painter, I produced many paintings that were at least five feet tall.  I think the reason I have been so reluctant is because I feel as though the work might lose some of its intimacy.  In the case of Thomas’s work I think printing large images is appropriate because it draws our attention to the fact that the images are appropriated from magazines as we can discern a certain amount of grain in the image that tells us so.  Actually, I can think of quite a lot of photographers who print images large due to the content of the images: Jeff Wall, Andreas Gursky, Marilyn Minter.  However, after I thought about it and went on a google search for photographers who print smaller than a standard print I could not find a single photographer who did.  So, then maybe bigger is better?  Are people more apt to find an image fascinating when it’s large?  I’m not sure, but I’m definitely going to give it a try and although my search produced empty results as far as photographers go I did find an interesting illustrator who works small. Jason D’Aquino creates his small works on matchbooks and other found materials.  I find his drawings amazing, as they are extremely tiny and detailed.  However, I’m not sure how the content of his images relates to the fact that they are so small or that they are on matchbooks.  Either way, he is worth checking out. 

 http://www.jasondaquino.com/matchbook_gallery2.html#page