I do not do the digital work myself – I use a good local business to create
digital files to send to my clients - but I am careful to create my original
artwork to be able to withstand enlargement. I suppose if you are able and
willing to go and rework the art digitally after having your scan made, my
approach might not be so important.
But here it is, if of interest to you.
I usually work in watercolor and ink line, so I use very black India ink to
make thin lines and then I layer my watercolors. I check the art by making
enlarged copies of a small portion as I work. This is to make sure it holds up
to whatever % enlargement I am aiming for. Since figuring this simple process
out many years ago, my work has held up very well when produced as a mural. I
think it looks much better as the mural it is designed to be ... rather than as
the original artwork I painted.
It requires a slightly different “mindset” to work this way, but it garners
good results for me.
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:39 PM
Subject: [SCIART] Increasing the size of artwork for
I have a process question that I hope some more experienced
illustrators might be able to answer. I am at the very beginning of a
project creating three historic scenes that will eventually be reproduced for
display, each on a panel aprroximately 6ft by 2ft. I've been taught and it has
been my preference to create original artwork that is at least slightly larger
than its final format, scaling things down always tightens things up
nicely. But in this case it seems a waste of time, not to mention
daunting. Is it alright to blow up an image, say, 200%? If I painted
a 3 x 1 ft scene and did a high resolution scan, would it look alright
enlarged? I would probably be working in watercolor and graphite, though I
could go digital as well. I'd really appreciate any advice you have to
Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions