I was reading a book on Wayne Theibaud's work last night. And a quote really struck me.
"What sort of Medium fits your image. Is there a more legitimate medium for that?"
His question was directed to choosing a drawing media, and it is a legitimate one, but many of us have chosen a singular medium to work with, so I think there is slightly different question that should be asked:
Does your image NEED your medium?
Looking at Theibaud's Gumballs, it is evident the paint brought something a photo wouldn't; enhanced lighting, composition, graphic-ness, and juicy texture all taking them beyond reality to a unique statement and intent!
I take a lot of pictures. Maybe one in 100+ ever get made into art quilts. When I search for the photo that will be the basis for my next piece, it can not feel "complete" already! It has to NEED fabric (surface or layers) and stitching to be complete. It can not be an image that can stand alone without being pierced by my needle! I am not always successful at this, but that is my goal.
I love using fiber as a media. It has qualities that no other media does, and I try very hard to remember those when picking my imagery. FOR ME (and it might be different for others) The image chosen, photo or not, must not be complete without the addition of the fiber and stitch, and the fiber and stitch needs the image for them to be complete.
This is also why the National Portrait Gallery is one of my favorite museums. to see the same basic imagery (human being) expressed through so many media and artists, is a wonderful schooling on how art is not replication, but is something beyond that; it must be a symbiotic relationship between the image and the media.
Above is an example of my original photo (left) and my finished piece (right)
"Where the Sidewalk Starts"
If you are really into history, click here for blog posts prior to 2014 !