Portrait For Critique
 

Here is one of the portraits I did for my upcomings portrait shows. It is a painting of my grandson while he slept (which wasn't for a long time!)

Renee Brown

Lovely light on the bed, wonderful colours. Lovely portrait of your grandson. One to be treasured!

Skin Tones...
 

Your skin tones look very "orangey" on my monitor...If what I am seeing is accurate, I think that this probably does a disservice to the delicate and pale skin tones of a caucasian baby. I generally like to lighten and cool these skin tones. Below is a detail of what I am talking about.....

Karin, Thank you.

That is so much more my digital camera's problem. The skin is much lighter and more cohesive in person. I used glazes to achieve that unity.

I just purchased a new higher megapixel camera and I am hoping the images will be more true to life in the future. I should have mentioned this when I posted. Thank you.

Renee

Digital photography
 

This reddish (of the three color channels, red green and blue) color cast of your photo has nothing to do with the camera's resolution. It's a function of the camera's metering for this photo. When a camera takes a picture, it first makes judgements about the image it's about to capture. For example, with values, it finds the darkest value in the scene at which it's pointed and records it as absolute black. It finds the lightest and records it as absolute white. All the other values of the image are averaged out between these two extremes.

A similar thing happens with color, only much worse. This is why photographs are seldom of much use to a portrait artist as color references. This problem with photographs of finished paintings can be remedied by varying your photographing technique, and/or possibly by tweaking your photograph with an image editing application such as photoshop (I use MS image composer, which comes with Front Page).

All digital cameras that I've seen, no matter how "automatic" offer some control of the metering, from "EV" settings to actual manual control of "shutter" speed and "aperture" opening. I've put these words in quotes because they actally refer to the operation of film cameras whereas digitals work differently, although this little tidbit is not important here! Any way, try playing around with these settings.

More importantly, try playing around with the lighting. Obviously, the inherent color/temperature of your lighting (e.g. flourescent vs.incandescent vs. full spectrum...) has an effect on the resulting photograph. Less obvious is the effect that the intensity and angle of your lighting has on the photograph. The way the camera meters the image is largely dependant upon the lighting. for example, in relatively dim lighting, there is a greater chance of color distortion. Whereas a film camera would respond to dim lighting by increasing the size of the aperture opening (the hole which allows light onto the film), a digital camera amplifies the signal, which is similar to distortion on speakers when you turn up a radio too loudly. I could go on with such trivia, but the point is PLAY WITH YOUR LIGHTING. I usually take many photos with different lighting and camera settings until I get a satisfactory photo which represents a painting's colors accurately.

To reduce glare when photographing paintings or any 2D piece, the piece should be "cross lit". This means that you should do ANYTHING BUT have your light source coming from the same direction as that from which you're photographing. This is one of the reasons why flash photography in general is so terrible. Lights should be placed pointing at the piece from the sides, so they're not reflecting back into the camera any more than neccessary.

Regarding resolution of digital cameras: Last I've checked, the lowest resolution available on hand-held digital cameras is 640x480. Despite the fact that a major marketing point is made of a camera's resolution, chances R that even this size is larger than any image U'd want to have on a web site (keeping file-size in mind). However, U're printing much, particularly large prints, resolution becomes a factor relevent to your image quality.

Not that I'm a big fan of orange babies, but I like the somewhat impressionistic use of color in your paintings overall. :) This is one of the things that differentiates paintings from photographs!

Hope this endless babble helps.

I've taken the libery of posting the version of Renee's portrait from her web pages. The skin tones are softer here than in her original image above in this thread.

As a general note, I've noticed when I scan, darks tend to go darker and lights tend to go lighter with very light areas often looking almost totally washed out. I do selective adjustments, where needed before posting a portrait on a web site for this reason. But, I've been scanning and adjusting portraits for 6 years and this isn't something everyone is going to be able to do.

Cynthia, Karin and Jim,

Your words are not falling on deaf ears. I am in my 'rethinking', 'mulling it over' and 'deciding' stages as to how I can apply your excellent advice to my work.

Above in Cynthia's post is the painting photographed in daylight (indirect sun). A little glare-back from being outside. I have the Smith-Vector lighting system Jim. I use the 500 watt photobulbs at a 90 degree angle so the light falls sideways across the painting. I only need to use one lamp since the light is so strong. I bought 250 watt bulbs to light my clients (one lamp) with a 40" umbrella for fill. Do you all use boom lights or rim lights behind the client? What else do I need to buy? I know one thing- the background in a bag from Photek. Is the 6' x 7' big enough for most sittings?

I find my HP200c (not an expensive camera) seems to pick up every color even underneath the final glazes. (Probably a good thing in most cases, right? Just not here as the cad. orange is shining through.) I am hoping the new Sony cybershot50 I just bought will do a better job.

Karin, I had printed out your learning page and I notice that you have cadmium orange on your palette. I have been using cad. orange with thalo green light, yellow ochre and titanium white to make the lights on this baby (my sweet grandson). For the shadows I used chromium oxide green, cad. red dark and a touch of alizarin crimson with tit. white to soften.

Karin, How did you get those soft ochre looking tones on your beautiful portrait? You probably are not using the cad. orange, right? It's a very strong color and I should probably reserve it for turning the planes.

Cynthia, I see you brought over my photo. Thanks. I always have trouble getting the pixels right on the tinyheads. However, I am out of my experimenting stage and am back to my usual blond again. Thanks to all for the good advice.

Renee

Skin tones
 

I only use cad orange in the deepest shadows. For the halftone....where the plane turns away from the light, I use cool paint (almost blue).

It is the overlaping of warm and cool paint from the highlights down into the deepest shadows that allows one to get those soft skin tones.

The following URL has a section that explains this in (I hope) more understandable detail.

http://kcwells.com/technical2.htm

Renee, I'd love to see your portrait show. Nice feeling, lovely light. Skin tones are light-dependent, as everything else, it can be misleading to think in terms of 'Caucasian baby skin tones' (sorry, Karin), particularly if this takes you away from seeing and painting in terms of light on the skin / form. Speaking of light on form, here's where I have some problems. Some of the areas, particularly above the eyes, read (in this scan) too bluish or greyish. Maybe it's your technique, lovely, painterly, but I bit on the 'wooly' (I don't want to call it 'splotchy', 'cause it's not) side. There's also an area on the jawline (exposed to the light) which doesn't read quite as 'baby form'.

I do want to see your portrait show. Let me know where it's gonna be!

Skin tone range
 

Hmmmm....I'm not sure that I understand your comment John and I'm not really sure that we disagree. Of course light and shadow play on all shades of skin tone for sure. I have seen your work and you certainly get it right.

In general (and I do mean general), I paint people of color the same way as people with lighter skin tones. The difference is that the value is darker (according to the sitter) and darker shades, can take more warmth (I use yellow ochre) into the mixture.

Basically what I am trying to say is that the pale skin tones (i.e., the "caucasian baby" reference) can not handle a lot of hot colored paint. When a skin tone begins to look "orangey" (either in light or shadow) the artist needs to cool it down.

"Orangey" skin tones are such a common mistake...

John,

Thank you. Actually, I could use some help with the framing! :D I must've been dreaming earlier this year when I scheduled the kickoff of the shows for January 2002, not realizing I'd have to do the finishing touches on the frames during holiday season!)

Yes, I see what you mean about the surface around the eyes being too texturized. That jaw was all in light and in trying to add some color to break that monotony I probaby hardened the edge too much.

I think learning skin tones is the hardest art technique I have ever had to learn and I see that others have similiar problems mastering it. The more I work at it though, the easier it gets.

Karin, Now that we are onto my orange problem, here's a perfect time for me to ask what you start your lights with. Is is a yellow ochre/white base? Any alizarin? Cad. red? Which green or blue are you using to cool off the halftones? Perhaps my cad. orange should be put away in the drawer for a while. ;)

Renee

Renee,

Look up my post in the materials & techniques section under "Flesh tint in oils" for ideas on hues to use. There are other valuable bits of info by other artists there.

Don't eliminate cad orange, just keep it on the palette for one of its roles: in the flesh, as a "brightening / warming modifier". Ultramrine is the best blue modifier for the flesh (which you appear to use), but of course, as everything else, it has to be observed and mixed carefully in total context with the color of the light on the form.

Your 'orangy skin' on the painting doesn't bother me at all precisely because of the light context, even if, strictly speaking, it's not 100% 'true' to (yes, Karin, I got it) 'Caucasian baby skin' in that PARTICULAR lighting situation. But it's close enough, in my view, to be perfectly acceptable.

You may also try Grumbacher Pre-tested Cobalt Rose (Cobalt Violet Light), that's how the color is designated, a very weak light reddish purple that mixes wonderfully with, say, the Old Holland Naples Yellow Deep (a must for the flesh) to give you exquisite flesh tones with just the right amount of cool.

Sorry I can't help you with the framing over the holidays, have a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Because I seldom paint a la prima, the way I get a skin tone might not work for you unless you are glazing over a raw umber and white underpainting mixture like I do.

Meanwhile, if I were to work in the direct method of painting, I would approach skin tones in a way that is similar to how John describes it...

There are as many ways to paint paintings as there are artists to paint them. And probably all of them are "the right method" if the finished product looks good.

I think that the key to any artist painting well is to "train the eye" and this is most easily accomplished by copying the Old Master paintings. Copying demystifies skin tones and so many other things about painting will automatically fall into place.

John, Well, there are two colors I need to buy, the cobalt violet and I have naples yellow but there's probably another tube labeled NY Deep. I am heading over to the materials forum to read your posts.

Chris Saper is probably rolling her eyes if she's reading this thread, because she knows I have her excellent new book. I came from a landscape background with a Very limited palette (six or seven colors - mixed any shade I needed and had a unified palette). I always have figure within my landscapes but their skin tones consisted of a simple warm where the light hit, one halftone and then a cool in the shadows (simple and effective). Now it's a landscape of the face and very subtle value changes. No trees to mark the passages :D . I remember the first time I read John Howard Sanden's Book and saw all the recipes and color choices. I felt the same way I do when I am in a large clothing store. Too many choices.

I feel that I should be developing my own palette and hopefully in time I will. (probably I am and don't realize it) Right now, I stand in front of my easel and it's information overload time. If there are any golfers out there, I feel the "rules" running through my head, in the same fashion as when you line up your tee shot.

Karin, I have seen the artists standing in front of the old master paintings at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, copying. It's such an excellent experience. In the spring, I will get in there and really study them again. I will be looking at the Sargents in the American wing with new eyes. I used to go into the Met a lot and hopefully soon will feel comfortable enough to do that again.

Renee

Renee, yes, if you have plain 'ole Old Holland Naples Yellow it is not good. It's a weak color, you can use to lighten something but not to mix rich starting flesh tones. You need the Deep, a totally different animal.

Look at a broader palette as you would look to a grand piano instead of a kiddie piano if you were to play some serious music. Not as a matter of more choices, or possible confusion, but as a range of richness always there, even if you sometime decide to play a little minuet.

I will post my 36-plus-white palette in the materials and technique section in the near future.

Copying old masters paintings is indeed a very good idea, and you can do it from books, but of course better at the Met or any other museum.

Happy Holidays!

John, I printed out and read the entire section on skin colors. Last night I mixed what I had on hand, Naples yellow and thio violet and titanium white. Actually made a light without my old standby, cad. orange! Looked like skin tone to me! I will get the recommended colors (NYD and Rose) now. This thread has changed my palette for the better and for that I thank all of you. Karin, Thanks for the first mention of the problem. I also got a lot of hints from Cynthia's palette.

John, Your painting of Elizabeth Morrisette is beautiful! The texture in the background, pillow and her blouse is amazing.

You mentioned a book (in jest? or for real?)

Happy Holidays to all of you, as well.

Renee

Renee,

I don't paint. You must have meant someone else's palette.

Cynthia, I see what happened. You posted and cc'd an original post by K Martin. When I saw your photo I thought it was from you. I was about to head out to search for your paintings on the Stroke of Genius website!

Maybe someone is trying to tell you something! :D

Renee

Oh, Karen Martin's post that I brought over from the old forum. Okay.

Honestly, I'm not that kind of artist. Besides, who would take care of Stroke of Genius? :)

Something to consider is how to lead the eye of the viewer to the subject. The viewers eye goes to where the lightest light meets the darkest dark, where warm meets cool, and where there is a hard edge. Most of this happens in this painting away from the subject. I find the most important part of the painting to be the white bear, surrounded by dark blue, with piercing black eyes. The dark background against the light bed is also distracting. The dark pants and the sharp edge at the waist also pull my eye from the subject. Try covering these areas with your hands and I think you will see that the child becomes the center of interest.

Steve

Cynthia, No, we need you here! You're doing a fabulous job running "Stroke of Genius". One of the best website designs ever!

Steve, An artist friend who pulls no punches with me (praises me when I do well, too) just said, two days ago, exactly the same thing. She said the dark background pulls her eye right out of the painting. The thing is that dark area was a fairly light background (just the couch with a flowered fabric) originally and I changed it for drama. Looks like an error now. Thanks, and I'll check out the value on the pants as well. Well, it'll be easier to patch this rather than repaint it.

As an aside, I just delivered this commission yesterday. Five different dogs from the same family, not five views of one dog. It cost the client a nice bit of money but she offered the painting for my first show. As she is framing it herself, I did not want to be held up in case it is not ready by Jan. 2, 2002. Plus, I do not want the insurance hassles.

Here's how I solved my problem. With the client's permission, I took the original to a Minuteman press and had them xerox the entire painting. Almost exact copies, very little color loss. It had to be pieced together with rubber cement but you can barely see the seams under glass. Then I have a local framer cut the double mat to compliment the colors in the background (in this case, COG and BS mix). I bought a 24" x 30" piece of glass for the frame and I have one more large piece for my show. No loss of time from getting ready for the show as a result doing the commission. Plus, the more commissions shown, the better. Credit is given under the painting: "Print From Original Commissioned Oil, Collection Mrs. ............".

Renee

Happy New Year to All,

I do listen to all your advice. My portrait show is being installed tomorrow and the framing is almost done. I did lighten the background ( according to your advice)on the painting of the baby. The pants took so much work that I am afraid to get started on that right now as this painting must be in the show.

Thanks to everyone.

Renee

There are so many good threads now on critique. That's great to see.