data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/de6cb/de6cbb7cd75a45a474341a98b94bf5c08832b96c" alt=""
We've engaged in an ongoing, friendly debate over calling the paintings "miniatures."
Inevitably, it seems, we fall into calling them miniatures out of convenience and habit, but I've argued that, technically, I don't think a small painting necessarily equates a miniature painting. To me, a miniature is created when an artist consciously attempts to paint a realistic scene or object in as small a scale as possible.
Much of what I do in small scale isn't so much a matter of attempting to paint as small as possible, but as conveniently and quickly as possible (e.g. my lunchtime paintings).
So are my lunchtime paintings minis? I guess it's up to the viewers to decide?
What do you think? What is the definition of a miniature, and is size the determining factor?
At right is one of the small-scale paintings I did for the show, which will open in October. I'll pass along details when Mary gets everything arranged. The size of the painting is 2 inches by 4 inches, and it's matted in a 4x6 frame. It's one of four little scenes that I completed, which, as a set, complete a larger landscape. So I guess it's part one of a "tetraptych."
The image is a little blurry because I forgot to photograph it before framing. So I shot through the glass with a polarizing lens to neutralize reflections. Sorry!