Dear Charlie,
on the first question: In the first step, I would calibrate each item individiually. In the second step, you have to decide how to combine the two attributes to derive set-membership values for 'size of a farm'. This is a conceptual matter. If you say a farm is large when many people are working on it and when the area size is large, you have to take the minimum over both attributes. If a farm is large when many people are working on it or when the area size is large, or both, you take the maximum. This is discussed in Goertz's book on concept formation (2006), for example.
On the second question. I think that direct calibration only makes sense when the variable that is calibrated is continuous. This is probably not possible based on interview data, which may explain why there are no texts on this specific element of a QCA study. If you want to work with fuzzy sets, you could manually assign set-membership values based on how you code the information in the interviews. For example, one could assign values of 0, 0.33, 0.66 and 1 as set-membership values.
I hope this helps.
Regards
Ingo