Joan of Arc background
 

Hi everyone,

My underpainting is 2/3's of the way complete. Currenty the background is still a mid-tone grey. I used Paint Shop Pro 7 to add a misty/cloudy type of background to see the effect before actually painting it in.

I had considered an interior, old church background but I am afraid it will detract from the figure. What do you think?

The previous steps of this underpainting can be seen in the Works In Progress section of the forum. The panting , by the way, is 40" x 30".

Thanks

Dan,

It's going to be a great piece.

One thing to consider, if you put in a specific historical or architectural background, it may add interest in a way, and show off your painting skills. It thus makes it a historical document, with that girl as your prototype Joan.

BUT - the misty, indistinct background lets all young girls project themselves into the painting as the subject, which may be empowering also, and takes it out of a historical context and makes it timeless. Being a minimalist myself, this appeals to me graphically too.

OR - you could go with a mythical, rocky landscape with a lot of distance and mist, but no architecture to date it. Sort of a "Lord of the Rings," New Zealand look. Or see Leonardo's "Mona Lisa" or "Virgin of the Rocks."

Really eager to see it finished. Good luck!

Tom

WOW
 

Ok, now you have given me more options. LOL. My brain is swimming in confusion. But, you have given me interesting aspects to consider. As I complete the underpainting of the figure, I will play those over in my mind.

Thank you very much. I appreciate the help.

Dan

What a nice piece! I do have a couple of suggestions, though. The light areas on the far side of the face (below the eyebrow, below the eye and around the far corner of the mouth) are too light and force that part of her face to come forward too much, causing distortion.

Otherwise I like it a lot. The armor will be fun to paint. I look forward to seeing the finished image.

The Face
 

Hi,

The face isn't actually as bright as it apears to be. A close-up view is available in the "Works In Progress" section. But if it's ok, I will post it here.

This is what I was thinking. Just those three spots on the right side of her face might need to be darkened down a bit.

Dan,

I tend to favor simple backgrounds and would guess this painting would benefit by keeping it uncluttered. I also recommend thumbnails or preliminary roughs as a way of sorting out your options before the start of a painting. As you are now finding out it's harder to make something fit as an afterthought. As Sargent has stated the whole is more important than the pieces.

The background on one side does not relate to the background on the other side. I realize your intent but don't be too obvious with the light against dark and dark against light silhouette attempt.

Good concept and fine start.

(You might might include her right hand. The arm tends to end at the elbow where the armour is finger-like.)

Quick question: is that the grip a soldier would use to draw or to sheath a sword? I would guess the grip would be overhand. Before background issues, I'm having trouble believing the anatomy, the gesture of the figure.

I'm posting your original resource photos here; note the difference between the arm in your original photo and the arm in your underpainting.

Hi Jim,

I did more thumbnails than you would believe. But as I always do, I second guess myself later on during the project. I will keep the background simple. I think that will work best. As for her right hand, I simply haven't added it yet. I will probably do so today, as I add folds to the skirt.

Hi Mari,

I have been waiting for someone to mention the way the sword is being held. I was going to ask if anyone noticed it.

The sword is being gripped in such a way as to place it "back"....not "withdraw" it. My intent is to show restraint in use of force. But to have the force there if needed.

Dan--

Hope I didn't waste too much of your time with other suggestions and subsequent confusion. But now you know what you want to do, and the simplicity of this approach will work just fine.

Jim's right about the gradation of the background ending above her left eye--our right. I have always had a devil of a time with something this simple, as in deciding where to change tones behind the figure. I painted really "patchy" backgrounds as I started, and still do sometimes.

What if the gradation followed the diagonal axis that you've already established from lower left to upper right corner. It would tend to break somewhat lower on the dark side of her head, and the lower half of her face and shoulder would start to emerge from it on that side. Might give you an opportunity to (somewhat) lose the edges on that darker side. Might heighten the drama.

When I started to look again at this issue in Sargent, I began to realize that if the PERFECT background value is set behind the head, the tonal variations can be very subtle and compressed and still give a real feeling of space and atmosphere around and behind, without a lot of patchy value change. I'm only beginning to get it, and have to fight hard for it.

Best--TE

Hi Tom,

Thank you very much. The idea of graduation diagonally NEVER occured to me. I guess we can sometimes get caught up in the subject of an important work and forget the basics. Or, I am just senile ...haha

I have reworked the hand/sword as had been suggested elsewhere and it works better. I am a little behind on this painting because I am also working on a series of oil paintings called, "Creation of Woman" as well as oil and pencil portrait commissions.

Unfortunately since the "Creation" works are nudes I can not post them here. I had a 2 hour photo shoot with the model last Saturday. I had searched 2 yrs for the right model.

When I complete the underpainting, I will post another digital image of it. Since I have done it in oil, I will have to wait for the final strokes on the underpainting to dry completely before I begin to apply the semi-transparent and transparent glazes.

I'd say this work will be able to stand a pretty powerful background if you paint it with the same careful, delicate method you've done thus far. Go for it, but don't fake it. If you use ref use about a 50 mm lens, no zoom etc. You know this already, Tim

Joan of Arc Glazing
 

Hi Everyone,

I am sorry I have not posted in a while but I got behind in my commissions and other projects that needed completing (Creation of Woman).

This image is a quick digital pic of the face with 4 glazes so far. I figure I have 1-2 more to finish smooting it down.

Thanks,
Dan

She's lovely!
 

What a powerful work! Her eyes are stunning. The background is very nice, very period-piecey.

I can't wait to see it when you're all done, and maybe some more work-in-progress pics from the glazing too?

Beautiful!

Joan of Arc 75% completed
 

Hi everyone,

Here it is 75% completed. I have the hands to finish as well as the sky on the left side and bolts and glazes on the armour.

Hope you like it....so far...

Dan

I love it - it is so dramatic.
Is this for a commission?

Hi Kim,

Thanks. I am glad you like it. This is not s comission. I will be doing prints of it at the first of the year.

I tried to keep track of how many glazes I've done on it. I believe there are 17 so far.

Dan

Dan,

You

If most of these references are being made to the closeup image, thay have been addressed partially or completely in the full length view.

Further halftones have been applied since the full length view was posted.

The chalkiness you speak of I don't see in the original or in the images on my screen....that may be a result of computer viewing.....we will see.

Much has been done since the full lenth was posted. I will post a new image in a day or so.

Thanks for the feedback.

Dan

Close-up
 

Here is a close-up of the above full length view. A few more hours of work have gone into it since even this point.

I will post in a day or so.

Dan

Properties of Light
 

Hi everyone,

In regards to light on the shadow side of the face, let us not forget the simple natural properties. Light travels in a straight line and cannot turn a corner.

If a section on the shadow side of the face is lit (i.e. the side of the mouth), it is due to a "puffiness" characteristic of that person. Start eliminating these characteristics for the sake of an academic point of view and you change the anatomy of that person. A simple fact.

Dan

Dan,

I hope this does not lead to confusion but the question of light on the shadow side of the face may have as much to do with the color of those highlights than it does with value. Those lights on the shadow side tends to look more like a reflected light. In other words, much warmer than you might expect from main light source from our left.

Jim

Dan,

I don't think I've seen any mention of this. The way the clouds intersect with the side of joan's face creates a bothersome tangent for me. Maybe because they are so close in value. For me I think it works better if the head is separated as below.

Oops,

I now see that I did some meddling with the clouds on the left side of what I see is the cropped section of the painting. But, maybe you get my drift.

Hi Jim and Mike,

Good points. The question of light is that for this young lady, if you view the photo of her you will see that she has puffiness at each section of her mouth. The shadow side is puffy enough that it catches the direct light. Toning this down slightly would work but you don't want to lose the character.

I like the cloud changes, but yes it does look a little cropped. Since posting that photo I extended the clouds to the left side of the canvas. I have "lightened" the clouds on the right side at the hair (plus I added a slight reflected light to the hair there).

The model has severe allergies and when I photographed her, her eyes were puffy, swollen and teary...I took some of that purpleish puffiness out of them.

Thanks again guys.

Dan

Yes, it's true and basic ("simple") that light defines form. I don't know that anyone is espousing an "academic point of view" otherwise at the expense of the realistic quality of the picture.

But let's understand here that we're not looking at the subject in the "true" light of the setting, but rather in a strong, directional studio light quite removed from that setting. It's then the translation of that reference to an invented outdoors location -- and a dark, moody one as well -- that is making elements of the studio lighting seem too prominent, whether in shape, value, or as Jim has just suggested, hue or temperature. We're working with pieces from two or three different puzzles (studio figure, invented armor, imagined landscape) and we're just trying to adjust and assemble them into a new, artistically rational picture. (The way around this is to just have Joan pose in this setting, and paint fast.)

No one has said anything about eliminating characteristics.

Hi Steve,

Yes, assembling this puzzle has been most interesting. I have worked this way for many years and each painting has new and different challenges.

I have had to take the studio light (blue photo bulb) image and warm the skin tones to match the new and moody surroundings.

The armour, thank God, I was able to "mould" to her own figure. Then again, match the light and reflected colors of the surrounds.

HaHa....yes Steve, I can see me now with Joan on a hillside in France at dusk painting faster then the speed of light...

Dan

Joan's Tear
 

Just thought I would post the allergy tear pic, just for the fun of it....

Latest Image
 

Hi everyone,

Here are the latest images. Please excuse the glare at the top of the canvas. I did these quickly.

Dan

Close-up
 

Here's a close-up.

Dan,

Forgive me for dragging out my own work to illustrate my point and though the lights on the shadow side of this face look a little too light (the digital file is a higher contrast than the finished work) I offer it to demonstrate that you can get away with those "highlights on the shadow side if they relate to the light source somewhere from our left and are faithful to the underlying form.
I think you will see a distinction between source light and reflected light. You have tackled a difficult lighting situation.

Jim

Hi Jim,

I love the fact of you posting your painting to demonstrate a point. The light on the right side of mouth (shadow) is very characteristic of Carol (although she is 22 yrs old lol).

I see exactly what you mean. I agree that the digital files are higher contrast then the originals. I have tried to tone mine down so that you can see it more like it really is.

Thanks.

Dan

I think what Steven is trying to say (correct me if I'm wrong) is that in the reference for both portraits there was probably a lot of light on the shadow side of the faces but that it's not always the best thing for the painting to render it the way it shows in the photo.

Perhaps some portrait photographers would have moved the light source so that there weren't those strong lights on the far side of the faces to begin with. I'm not saying it's necessarily wrong to light a face that way. It's just that I think it makes a head feel more round (less flattened) if the light is not set up to create small strongly lighted areas on the shadow side. Part of the value massing thing.

Personal preference, perhaps.

Hi Michele,

I am thinking that your statement, "personal preference", may be the key here.

If I had moved the light from Carol's face to a point where the "bright" light on the shadow side wasn't there, then there would have been virtually no light on the side (she has a bit of a big nose). You need only look at the reference photo of Carol to see that the shadow from her nose already extends far into the right side of the face.

I think it is simply the subject's facial characteristics that makes this light brighter than in someone whose face may be less disticnt at these areas. (I am really trying to avoid saying puffiness and big nose a lot if I can help it.)

Dan

Dan,

I think "personal preference" is a fair note. Soft north light presents a softer and more traditional feeling. Studio light gives away the fact that a subject is under artificial light and for a good part of the last 100 years our society has learned to live with man made light and an argument could go on forever about the better source.

I would suggest that it is subject/situation related and neither is right nor wrong. I hope it doesn't sound like a bias but I think there is a lot to be said for studio light given the fact that many of our friends and associates are only known to us under artificial light. I think I digress.

Here are two more examples of strong lights on the shadow side of the face. The top painting is by SOG member Zhuo S. Liang < http://www.liangstudio.com/ > and the second by Raeburn who never saw a light bulb.

These are wonderful examples Jim.

Thanks