Mayor of the Year Portrait Photos
 

Here are three photos which I just took for a new commission. The woman is a mayor and is being honored as NJ Mayor of the Year. I'm planning to use the face closeup for her head but I'd like to hear input about which full figure photo I should use for the body and how much of her should be included.

(There has to be a way to include multiple images in a message!)
Here's No. 1:

Here's No. 2:

By the way, the point is that she's the mayor of a shore town.

Here's the head:

The only way to include more than one image in a post is to use the IMG command with a web address from a server. However, we discourage the use of that.

Thanks, Cynthia. At least I know I wasn't missing something.

I had a devil of a time nailing this subject down for a photo session - I had been been trying to coordinate a meeting with her for well over a month now - and the painting has to be presented on April 11th, so I'd better just go ahead on my own. Maybe I'll do the first pose down to just including the hands and see whether vertical or horizontal will work better once I get into the studio and look carefully at the dimensions.

I vote for vertical. In general, I find them more graceful. I assume you have closeup shots of her face since in the size images you are showing, the face is so small and far away...very hard to paint from I would think. You can post up to 400w and 600h in the Forum.

Hi, Leslie.

I think the major challenge you have is to avoid having this become a painting of a large, really red shirt. Whether it's blowing in the breeze, I can't tell, but it certainly calls attention to her girth, leaving little opportuntity for the face to be the focal point. Do you have an opportunity to take addiitonal photos with different clothing?

If you can't take more photos, you might think of just a head and shoulders format.

I've been having a lot of trouble getting decent scans with PhotoShop, which is why the resolution of the images is so poor. I think my computer is running out of memory and won't let me kick up the sharpness or size - but I'm upgrading on Friday and hopefully that will address that problem.

I shot two rolls of film of her; these were the best poses and expressions. I was not thrilled at the brightness of the red but she told me that her husband had insisted that she wear that color since it's a signature for her. I was hoping to be able to dull it somewhat, but yes, it's definitely a bit overpowering. After I posted the images here I noticed that just the head shot was quite attractive, but it's to be a 24x30 painting and I didn't want the head to be as large as it would be if I used only that and the shoulders.

I played with the vertical vs. horizontal format this morning and if I wanted to include both hands on the railing,cutting her off just below the shirtline, the horizontal worked better, otherwise the figure would have had to be too small.

Any other suggestions about what to do with that shirt? I suppose I could always just make it white, but whatever I do with it there's an awful lot of cloth involved. Or should I just paint a really large face and shoulders?

Here's a version with the red desaturated some. I actualy prefer the verson with one hand on the railing and vertical. To me, it has a more relaxed, graceful appearance.

I think you should do the best painting your judgment allows. If that means head and shoulders, and the canvas will need to be 20 x16, than that's what they should get. You can dramatize scale with the frame.

But don't paint a giant head, unless giant heads are your signature.

You can desaturate the red with its complement, but I personally wouldn't try to change the color unless I planned to work the whole painting from a grayscale. There's a LOT of reflected color in the face.

p.s. What about some new photos with a white blouse and red scarf?

This is an award and needs to be the same size as the previous one so I'm stuck with the dimensions. And it took over a month to nail her down for this photo session; she's super busy. Between her schedule and the weather (more snow is forecast) I don't think I can grab her again. Also the thing is due the first week of April because they have to get it framed in time for the presentation on April 11th. It doesn't leave me many options. I guess I have to go with what I've got, desaturating the red as much as possible, and hope it works. Thanks for your input.

Leslie,

Another option for knocking back that dominant red shirt, since you can't schedule another photo shoot: paint a shawl over it, or a blazer, in a different color. I'd do thumbnails, check out what different value shawls do for the composition (choose the value according to what gives you the most powerful 3-value composition). Then I'd set up a model or a mannekin in a red shirt with the chosen shawl to see how the fabric drapes.

The red shirt, the red "mud-face" you get in that full-sun light key (the light is not flattering her features in either photo), the deeply-shadowed squint caused by that full-sun light key, and I'll mention the very dominant (distracting) rails here, too -- I see lots of challenges to this reference photo.

Somehow you need to simplify what's going on in this photo.

I personally think that these out of door, in full sun photos, are double tough to make work. I would hate to think that the background that you show is driving this pose.

I think that an indoor shot with controlled lighting (even with the red shirt) gives you a much better opportunity for success.

Is it really all that important to those viewing this portrait to be reminded, with a distant glimpse of water, that she was the mayor of a beach community?

P.S.

What about going to her office and blending in with your camera? Either taking some candid shots or setting up a chair near a window. Maybe she could spare 15 minutes.

Thanks for your suggestions, Mike and Mari.

I was actually hoping for some ideas about how to orient the picture, and which hand treatment and how much of the model to use, but you've all certainly re-sensitized me to the importance of just saying "No" when the subject's wearing something so problematic.

My specialty is "portraits in a natural setting," so that's what people expect when they commission a painting from me. I try to find a background that says something about the individual and that enhances his or her persona. Sure, I could go in and try to catch her in her office but I have no idea what I'd do with those photos; it's just not my style.

With that time line facing me I've been working on it today and I've got the thing blocked in now, using the first pose but cutting her off just at the hem of her shirt to avoid those rails, which bothered me, too, and then using the head I posted. I ended up with a horizontal orientation because it worked better for getting both hands in without making her too small. I'm going to soften those harsh shadows in her face and also dull the red, leaving only the highlights of the shirt bright and bringing in red in her ears and lips and so forth. And I'll show you what it ends up looking like and you can all say, "I told you so!";) But nonetheless I think she'll like it because it's what she wanted.

Oh, the portrait's going to be presented at the annual NJ Conference of Mayors gala and it will hang in her living room in Stone Harbor, right by the beach.

I am reminded of this great painting by John de la Vega ...

http://www.portraitartist.com/delavega/lisarail.htm

I'm not suggesting that you hoist this woman's leg up onto the rail but maybe some ideas on what to do to make the background more interesting.

Please rethink this approach. For starters, by going to her office and photographing her next to a window, you'd probably get much better shots of her face and figure without the squinty eyes, harsh lighting, messy hair and the gigantic red inflated shirt. Then go and compose a beautiful photo of your/her favorite natural setting and combine the photos...i.e., paint it into the background.

The great outdoor backgrounds of the Old Masters were done separately...the model posed in the studio where the light was controlled. The background was painted in separately to create a mood and enhance the figure.

Here is a painting that Sir Thomas Lawrence did and he did NOT paint or have the model pose outdoors.

And here is another one NOT posed outdoors. I would like to think that no matter what your "style" is - it will not get in the way of producing the highest quality painting that you can muster. Poor reference material is a bad way to begin - most especially when you have a choice in the matter.

And the best part of what Karin is suggesting is that the subject, the mayor, gets her mind's eye self-image, but you get to do everything right in terms of flattering your subject, composing the painting, and creating something so much more than a painted snapshot.

All right, all right. You win. I went back in snow and sleet and took some natural light photos of her in her kitchen this morning, and I'll piece the references together. She and I still like the expression on the first face best, but now I have enough information to soften the shadows and open her eyes a bit. Here's one of the ones I took today:

And here's a much better scan of the face we like; maybe you can now see why. Anyway, thanks again for all of your time and help; I think it will be a much better painting now.

Close but no cigar. Would you be willing to try it again?

1. You really need a smile with her mouth closed.

2. If you wish to paint her "full face," you need to turn her shoulders at a 45 degree angle and have her gently twist at the neck to look at the camera. This will slenderize her body and the painting will look less like a passport photo.

3. Be sure that the light does not cut the face in half.

4. If you have her sit and lean (almost uncomfortably) forward and raise her chin, you will be able to get rid of the double chins and get some catchlights in her eyes.

Oftentimes I find it much easier to actually paint a portrait than to take the initial pictures for a good photographic reference. If you wish to make a career of portraiture, it is necessary to master some photography basics...and now when you have an important commission is as good a time as any to begin.

Karin, thanks for looking. She doesn't smile with her mouth closed, though; at least, when she does it doesn't look natural. I worked on the painting for awhile today and slenderized her torso somewhat; I'm also putting lots of shadows and other shades into the shirt so that it's not solid red. And I'm softening the shadows in her face so that they're not as stark. Frankly, I really like the way it looks so far. I'll post it when I'm done. It may never be the sort of painting you or Chris or Mari or Mike would do but it's very much in the style I've carved out for myself. And I do appreciate the tips; I'll definitely keep them in mind for my next photo sessions. Thanks again to everyone.

Leslie,

Since I am the bad girl of photo reference. ;)

I played with this quickly in PhotoShop, but I see you have started it, so it may be late in coming.

I really agreed with Chris on the shirt color, you are stuck with what you have, but I played with that.

It's frustrating when you can't get it right, I know!

This is rough, but just an idea. You would really have to watch all that reflective color.

For future photo sessions, if you really love that outdoor strong light look, check out the paintings of Hongmin Zou (on this site). He poses his subjects with the direct sunlight coming over their shoulder and none of the light falls on their faces.

Doing that would give you an opportunity to show subtly modelled features and no extremes of contrast but still gives you a lovely outdoor portrait.

An exposure tip: I would imagine he bounces light back into the faces with a reflector placed behind his camera as he shoots. That seems especially likely on the one shown below, with the woman in purple.

Here is an example of one of Hongmin Zou's portraits:

And another one:

You can also get this effect by using the "spot metering" option on your camera. Instead of allowing the camera to expose the entire scene (which usually means exposing for the background and putting the subject in relative darkness) it will expose for the center of the frame (subjects face) and cause the over exposure in the background. Can be a nice affect as shown above.

Michele, those are beautiful examples of outdoor portraits. I agree that they're definitely something to emulate. Several of my own have a similar look in terms of lighting, and you may find that the finished portrait of the mayor is a lot more even in illumination than my reference photo. I've found that photos very much exaggerate shadows so I've learned to compensate. But I'll have to take a look at Zou's portfolio. And I certainly appreciate all the suggestions from the forum.

Beth, thanks for trying out some alternatives; I certainly like the teal better but I'm viewing the red as a challenge and will go with that. I mentioned wearing another color to my subject when I went back for the second session, but she really wanted red. So I'll try to make it work.

Leslie, you said: and I am confused, what do you mean by "style" and how does it dictate your approach to a painting?

Your adherence to "style" really seems to have interfered with "quality." The photo reference section of this Forum is the one place where all of us - both pro and beginner alike - are pretty much on the same footing. Taking pictures is just plain hard work. Unlike handling a brush, rudimentary knowlege of handling a camera is simply not beyond anybody's skill level. To take a poor picture and delude yourself that it is OK for any reason will probably get in the way of ever making a quantum leap in the quality of your work.

"Mayor of the Year" sounds like a verrrrry important commission and a lot of people will probably see your painting and it could do a lot for your career as a painter. Right?

I'd hate to see you do anything less than what I know you are capable of. Some people who do not know how to take a decent photo will hire a professional photographer to take the photo for them. At the very least they are assured of decent reference material and the cost of this is factored into the fee.

For example, there is nothing basically wrong with the Mayor's red shirt, it is just the way that you photographed it that doesn't flatter her. She is also an attractive woman, but that is not enhanced in your picture either.

I also don't discount the possability that you may surprise me, manage to compensate for such a poor photo, and really paint a portrait of her that knocks my sox off...I hope so.