Top 10 Key Elements of a Portrait
 

What would you state are the top 10 key elements to the perfect portrait? There seem to be so many opinions out there as to what is a great portrait, but the key elements (regardless of what ranking order) should be similar - or am I just grasping for imaginary straws - seeking a true path to perfection?

Dominance is certainly one of the keys
 

This does not only apply to portraits, but generally all painting:

Dominant line
Dominant direction
Dominant size
Dominant shape
Dominant texture
Dominant value
Dominant color

Unity demands dominance.

Julianne,

This is not a question I take lightly. I have found that every (every!) master work has contained each of the elements listed below. When I do a critique or judge a composition, it is the inclusion or lack of these elements that I base my judgment on. This is what I teach. These are the criteria I hold myself to in my own paintings.

1) Composition
2) Accurate, strong drawing
3) Definite light and shadow massing
4) Three value massing
5) Correct color without losing value massing
6) Solidity, three dimensionality
7) Integration of features with anatomy and planes of the head.
8) Beautifully rendered features
9) Edges, edges, edges
10) Visceral connection between the viewer and the subject in the portrait

Peggy,

I like your list a lot. I knew composition had to be number one. Could you give a few words on #4, three value massing? And maybe as it relates to #5.

This is one of the things I learned fairly early on from Frank Covino and I try to incorporate it into my works. Dominance is a key factor in unity in art. Works of art that display dominance in each of the areas I mentioned before generally tend to be better works because they seem to be unified and in harmony with themselves.

Here in brief, is what is meant by dominance:

Dominance of Line - Keep the lines in a piece predominantly straight or curved and don't oppose your dominant line with too many lines of the opposite. Avoid tangents.

Dominance of Direction - Your support shape generally serves to establish your dominant direction. You can enforce that dominance by incorporating elements that move in a similar direction into the composition. If your painting is a long rectangle, then long shapes in the composition will enhance the impression and dominance of direction. Always, you should try to incorporate at least one element in directional opposition to your dominate direction to add interest.

Dominance of Size/Spacial areas - We have all learned that it is generally not a good idea to equally split areas in your composition. If you divide your panel in half with your horizon, it is not nearly as interesting as if you divide it 60/40 or 80/20. In that case, one primary space is the largest and dominates the work - even if it is not the focal point of the work. This is where the golden mean can really be your friend.

Dominance of Shape - Repetition of shape within the composition is something that is often sought after. If your have a large arch at the top of the painting, then continuing that oval shape elsewhere in the painting will create a dominance of shape that is more pleasing to the eye.

Dominance of Texture - Is the painting dominantly smooth and glossy, or is it largely impasto?

Dominance of Value - Rembrandt's works are often executed in the lower value range. If value is defined as High Key, Intermediate Key, and Low Key, then a lot of Rembrandt's paintings would certainly be classified as being with the Low Key or the lower end of the value scale - dominantly darker. I believe that this is similar to what Peggy mentions as her three value grouping.

Dominance of Color - One color or color range that generally appears more than any other in the work. This also plays into dominance of warm/cool relationships.

Mike,

I don't know how brief I can be :), but here goes.

I've posted two paintings, 19th century. These two paintings are important only in that they were the original paintings I recognized this principle in. If you go back and check out five centuries of paintings in black and white (to isolate the values) you will see the same pattern.

The light, middle and dark values are massed together. Within that value massing, the middle value, for instance, can be broken up into numerous values, from the darkest middle value to the lightest of middle values, but within the mass, it never crosses over into the light value or the dark value massing.

In this first painting, you will note that the head in the light and the cravat are the light values. The background, coat, and shadow on the side of the head are middle value. The vest is the only dark value. A very simple, very strong head.

In this second painting, much more complicated, you can really see the beauty of this principle. The hair and skin of the figures, the man's shirt, the woman's dress, the dog, are all light value. The man's coat, the tree, his back leg, are all middle value. The man's pants, the tree behind his head, and the grass he is walking on are all the dark value.

This is the key factor. Look at the woman's dress. There is a lot of information there, folds, and detail, detail in her hair. There are dark light values, light light values, but no matter how dark the values in her dress are, they never cross the line and become as dark as the lightest middle values.

Look at the middle values of the man's coat. Again, there is a lot of detail in the coat, buttons, folds, but no matter how light the lighted middle value gets, it is still darker than the darkest light value, and the darkest middle value is still lighter than the lightest dark value.

This is what I mean by three value massing. Controlling the values into light, middle and dark values, but within those three values, you have infinite value and color choices, as long as you do not cross over into the other two values. I think this is something that every artist knew until the 20th century, and then it was forgotten. We were not taught this very basic, very elementary principle.

BTW, Mike, this is where you get to play with composition. I contend that composition is not about line, but about value massing. (Phew...I think this is enough for now).

Oh! On your question about color correction without changing value, what I mean by this is you can put any color within a value mass, as long as the color doesn't cross the line and move into a different value.

I see this frequently in the postings on this site. On the middle value shadow on the side of the face, for instance, the reflected light onto the shadow will go too light, will cross the value line and become a light value. You need to be ever vigilant that when correcting for color into a value mass, to not cross over into a different value.

Lastly,

Here's how I apply this principle to my own work, in this black and white of Lin. Her head, body, and dog are a light value. Her dress is a dark value, and the rest of the painting is a middle value.

In the painting in the background, the entire painting is in middle values. There are no values darker the lightest dark value and no values lighter than the darkest light value. (...excuse my repeating this post of the Lin painting, but I think the principle is more easily seen when in black and white.)

Peggy,

That was a great lesson. I have never heard those principles explained.

I hope you get everything you want for Christmas. If you don't, you let me know.

Wow Julianne, this is a wonderful thread! Not only is it a print out - but a blow up and hang it on your wall thread! :thumbsup:

Simplify
 

Apart from the compositional things mentioned, once you have posed your subject and lighted it nicely, most of the other things will take care of themselves if you paint very faithfully from your subject.

Exactly what I was seeking!
 

It never ceases to amaze me how much information can be gleaned from this site!

Yes, Beth, I've already printed out and placed on my studio wall the details contained in this thread! I was truly seeking a list of items (a checklist if you will) I could compare my final painting to as well as works in progress.

My sincerest gratitude to those of you willing to share your insights, talents and knowledge with all of us! Especially to those posting examples or clarifying your concepts. I know that many ideas are easier to "show" than to "tell", so thank you for taking the time to write it all down.

Peggy, how do you know when the darkest light is not really the lightest middle value? Or the darkest middle value is the lightest dark?

Julianne,

You ask some great questions! This takes me to one of the most exciting aspects of the three value massing principle: how to control the composition of the painting based on the decisions you make on how to label the "fuzzy middle" in those "...is it a dark light or a light middle value" questions.

I don't have time to do another essay. I'm leaving town tomorrow for a few days. I would be glad to go into it with pictures upon my return.

Basically the principle is this: the definite light values, definite middle values, and definite dark values are all massed together. You can't make a middle value a dark value if it is not.

However, on the questionable values, "...is the shadow on a white shirt a light value or a middle value?", you can see if you like the composition better if the shirt shadow becomes part of the light value mass, or if you like it better if it is part of the middle value mass. If you decide it is part of the light value mass, you need to make sure it unquestionably belongs with the light massing. If this means that you need to make it a little lighter to mass in, this is what you must do. No fuzzy middles. Only three values.

This is where the strength of any painting comes in (re. Michael Georges comments....strong paintings are based on strong decision making.)

It's better to make one big mistake than to make many little wimpy mistakes. You can see a big mistake; the little mistakes just slide by and weaken the painting.

Peggy

The dirty dozen
 

Since it has been recently demonstrated that I have trouble counting to ten, I give you my list of my top twelve elements necessary to create a successful portrait.

In no particular order they are:

1. Proper planning

2. A strong design

3. Facility with one's chosen medium

4. Understanding of modeling and structure

5. Good drawing

6. Mastery of edge handling

7. A love of your subject

8. Understanding of atmospheric perspective

9. Good reference material

10. Proper lighting setup

11. An adequate amount of time

12. Unity

Great Marvin! Now I have to print it out and blow it up again! :)

This is a wonderful thread! Thank you Peggy for such a comprehensive explanation of value massing. These observations and techniques were not taught in my college classes. Could someone explain tangents a little more? I've read the term in other posts, but I'm not sure how it relates to a painting.

Forever in the debt of the experts of this Forum,
Renee Price

Thank you all
 

Julianne, you started an incredible thread. This is concise and to the point. Much valuable information in one location!

Jean

Marvin, I particularly appreciate Number 7. "A love of your subject".

Sometimes it's too easy to get wrapped up in the surfaces I'm rendering and forget the feeling!

My credo
 

When I do a portrait, I start with the soul and paint a person around it.

10. Paper
9. Stick of charcoal
9. Eraser (Oops, I already did 9)
7. Coffee
6. A customer (that should be number 1)
5. A light
4. Two chairs (does that count as two?)
3. Drawing table
2. More coffee
1. Pay!

Marvin, that is always my goal also but just what does a soul look like anyway?

On a side note to Marvin: I picked a heck of a day to be in NYC. My drive home in the snow was real fun. You would think that snow was some new kind of weather phenomenon by how unprepared many are for driving in it.

News flash if you are in the Northeastern U.S. in the winter. It can snow here so maybe snow tires and a little care on slippery roads might be advisable. To you SUV owners: you cannot stop any faster than a 2WD vehicle so SLOW DOWN!

Sorry, I am still a bit frazzled from my drive yesterday. :)

Massing values
 

Peggy,

Thank you for taking the time to explain about the value massing. The paintings you posted were especially helpful.

I can see how the three values are massed in the portrait of the gentleman. With the portrait of the couple though, there is some dark between the two light heads. I can see how the light values are generally massed together.

On your beautiful portrait of Lin though, I don't see how the light dog is massed with the rest of the light values in that portrait. Am I missing something? Perhaps 'massing' doesn't exactly mean touching, but there does seem to be a lot of dark between the dog and Lin.

I often read about the pitfalls of the 'floating bow', I suppose that's when you have a light bow that is not massed together with a light face? (Assuming dark hair). Is that the reason to watch out for the 'floating bow'?

Thank you for all the information you share on this forum!

Joan Breckwoldt

Joan,

Value massing does not necessarily mean all the same values need to be touching, it means that within a value mass, i.e., the dog, all of the values in that dog are light values. No bouncing around with a dark shadow under his chin, or middle value swirlies on his fur. All of the modeling and definitions are carried out in the value mass you've designated for that area.

The floating bow, I see as an atmospheric problem. The bow is usually further back on the head, and will not have the same high definition and bright color as something closer to the viewer, like the subject's nose. I could still be a light value, but the edges would be softer and more atmospheric.

Peggy

Ah-ha!
 

Peggy,

Ah-ha! Now I understand. I was under the impression that the ENTIRE painting should have only three masses. I will have to study some paintings, as you suggested, to let all this sink in.

Thank you Peggy,
Joan Breckwoldt

Almost four years old, this thread is so chock-full of essential fundamentals (an oxymoron, I suppose) that it deserved to be escorted back up to the head of the line for close examination by many members and guests who may not have had the good fortune of discovering it in the archives.

Thanks for resurrecting this, Steve. I remember printing this out, but haven't seen it in a while.

I've made this thread "sticky," which means it stays at the top all the time.

I once listed these seven tips for good sketching. They were ending notes from a video presentation of four seven minutes sketches.

1. Set limits. A good drawing is often achieved more by its limits than its excesses. A sketch that takes ten minutes can be better than one that takes ten hours.

2. Follow a good procedure. If you know where to start and where to finish and every step in between, you will free your mind to focus on style and technique.

3. Maximize your tool. A good chiseled point will help you maximize your style, speed and expression. If your lines are good, your drawing will be good.

4. Have fun! Let it rip! The enjoyment will show in your work.

5. Let more of yourself show in your work. Don't just focus on the form and the subject. A good drawing will have some of you in it. Don't smear away all your lines, or strokes.

6. Don't overwork it. Know when to quit. Don't fall into the bottomless pit of detail.

7. Trick the mind. A good drawing tricks the mind into stepping down from its higher critique. This is true especially of portraiture, A slightly impressionistic drawing, drawn correctly, will entertain the mind rather than belabor it.

Value massing
 

Charles Reid's book talks about value massing also. This concept also fits within and is based upon Edgar Whitney's value pattern theory in which he states that there are only 7 basic value patterns in all fine art of the great masterworks.
Charles Sovek also explained this as something which John Singer Sargent employed in his work. He called this a 'statement of values' in which each value shape remains unadulterated by high contrasts within them.

It is online at:

http://www.sovek.com/publications/ar...rets/page2.htm

Value patterns which are not kept unadulterated will become what Tony Couch calls "checkerboard animation'. I call it a 'wallpaper' pattern/design. The large value shapes are chopped up and, as most already know, larger shapes make a stronger statement and are more instantly 'readable' as Harley Brown talks about in his book (Eternal Truths).

I do know that these are only one way to paint . Charles Sovek's also wrote:

"But my teacher wisely delivered a short but eloquent dissertation that I eventually dubbed, "How I learned to look at a Sargent without wanting to paint like him." The reason for this caution is not because Sargent wasn't a superb artist, but because his paintings appear so easily executed. It's all too easy to get mesmerized with the technique, toss aside all other approaches and concentrate solely on duplicating Sargent's surface mannerisms. When this happens, you risk not only losing your own identity as a painter, but also miss the essence of why Sargent's paintings are so successful."


I really appreciate this discussion Peggy :thumbsup: as it is what we teach as a whole lesson on the 'statement of values' and unadulterated value patterns in our International Porcelain Artist Certification- Advanced Master Artist and Teacher lessons.

~Celeste
IPAT,inc. President and Editor of the International Porcelain Artist magazine
www.ipatinc.com