Mar 6
Originally uploaded by Dancing Crow.
Three layers of the same picture, trimmed in different ways and overlapped. The base is a print on cotton. The blue squares are printed on habotai silk, which is more see-through than I expected. There is a layer of printed silk organza over the whole thing. I cut two square holes in the organza, one is visible (lower left) one seems to be invisible (over one inch to the right, up one inch). I wanted to experiment with what is visible through several layers, but I always max out at three. Maybe I need to try more layers of sheerer stuff...
I used to run into these issues when I was making maps too. I tis tempting to think that more data is better, and to a certain extent that is true. A single variable map is not terribly interesting. A two variable map shows the relationship between two things (income level and divorce rates, for instance). That gets much more interesting, because you can start to see, and think about, something that changes across space, and whether there is any kind of pattern to the relationship between the two things you're mapping. Add a third variable and most people max out. The legend has become a cube, with 27 different categories possbile even if you only have low/med/high on each of three variables. The colors get to be indistinguishable, or you run out of distinctive patterns to use; the end result is too dense. Better to make two different maps.
So, although I think wistfully about layers and layers of scrim each with another interesting piece of image on it, once I sit down to try it out, I generally get grumpy.
Today was a circus day. Red Kate came, and hung upside down, and realized she might in fact accomplish a hand stand in this lifetime. Considering how worried she was when she showed up here to head north, she was very brave. She did a really great job too. I gave her the pictures of herself, which I hope she posted as she made me swear not to. Oh well. If she doesn't, I have one in reserve.
Recent Comments