As explained in the “Adding the 3rd Dimension” post, mounting the components of an artwork at different levels brings depth and movement and can present 3-dimensional elements of the image directly.
However, that’s not the only “xtra dimension” that is present in these artworks. Because the components of the image are mounted in different layers, there is a pattern among them. Should that pattern be random? Should it be regular and repeating? Should it be tied to the image itself? Not surprisingly, the answer depends on the image…
Regular vs. Random
The problem with a truly random arrangement of components is that the irregularities catch your eye for reasons that have nothing to do with the image itself. Instead, a “regular” pattern can be arranged so that it looks “random” – that is, its repetitive elements don’t stand out. A simple example is a 4 x 4 pattern with 4 components in each of 4 layers. In the example shown below, the layers might be mounted with Red above Blue, Blue above Green, and Green above Purple.
When this this unit is repeated, it creates a regular pattern in which nothing is conspicuous:
At this point, it doesn’t seem to have much to do with a water surface, does it? But when the pattern is “warped”, it immediately takes on the appropriate fluidity and feeling of movement:
Appropriate for an image shot through the wavy surface of Lake Tahoe, for example:
Patterns matched to elements of the image
Patterns can also be tailored for images with specific geometric elements, for example as in a picture of aspen trees where the vertical dimension is more dominant than the horizontal. A “1-2-3 pattern”, comprised of square, 2:1 and 3:1 h:w components is appropriate in this case.
In a photograph of the Ponte Pietra, a Roman bridge in Verona, Italy, a different, curved geometry is present. For this image, the arches of the bridge are complemented by a curving pattern taken from the classical cobblestone streets, in this case with 6 layers:
Woven Patterns
A “woven” approach can be more effective when the geometric shape of the entire scene is more important than its 3-dimensionality. For example, the crisscrossing lines of suspension cables are the dominant element in a photograph of the New Bay Bridge. Using them to define a pattern for components that tuck underneath each other results in an artwork that looks like it is comprised of long strips, emphasizing the geometry of the bridge.
A woven pattern is also useful for a scene in which perspective is the dominant element, as in a picture of the San Francisco Ferry Building during a night-time celebration:
If the pattern of components chosen to complement the image brings out another aspect not available to a 2-dimensional print – can we call it a 4th dimension? And there’s still another “xtra-dimension” to my artworks, which you can explore in the “Adding the 5th Dimension” post.