Hi Enzie,

Well, I went and re-painted that neck/cheek area from life. It took about 5 minutes. Rose has a pretty prominent Sternocleidomastoideus muscle, which makes her neck a kind of compound cylinder in this area. I reworked the eyes per your suggestions, and a few other things also. That neck area has not shown up well in the previous scans, and it's not going to show up very well in this one. The paint is wet and there is some glare, making it look blotchy and unfinished. I'm including an extreme blowup of the area in question to (hopefully) show that that area is really thoroughly blended, with a lot of modulation that's not coming through in what you see on screen. I think we're at the limits of what can be done via these posts. The colors and values in certain parts are just too subtle for the internet process. What you and I are seeing on the monitors is a misrepresentation of the true appearance of the painting. So I think I'm going to clean it up a little and call it quits on this one. It's just a study for the main event, and I've decided to change some aspects of the pose anyway. Thanks for all the help, it really made a difference.

John

Neck Close-up
 

Actually, the previous scan looks really low-contrast, and the neck doesn't look too awful on this screen. That means it'll probably look pretty weird on the other one. Here's the big blow-up of the neck area.

John, you are absolutely right. The last scans do not reflect the items I had pointed out. It does look correct and overall has become a very nice painting.

I can not for the life of me figure out how to get consistent scans of my work either and it is difficult to pinpoint when one should make corrections, based on what people see vs. what the painting really looks like.

Enzie,

You and me both! William Whitaker has said in several posts that he takes any digital reproduction with a grain of salt, and I've come to the same conclusion myself. I think it's great up to a point, but subtle shifts in color and value tend to get misrepresented. But it works pretty well for critiqueing drawing issues and anything that is moderately out of line. I suppose also that lots of folks are better at it then me, and have better equipment and software. I hope to get a digital camera before too long. Maybe that will allow things to be proofed more quickly. The way I'm doing things now is really tedious.

What the heck, though; we're lucky to be able to do this at all! God Bless Cynthia!

John