Daughter with a Pearl Earring - wip
 

Since I'm learning - and I am creatively stunted, I thought I would borrow a page from Vermeer.

So, what do you think - is this a gimmick or a valid portrait?

Nuts and bolts - it's 16" x 20" oil on gesso panel. Working from photos of my daughter (who posed willingly once I gave her a candy bar - would that all models were to be had so easily).

Her ears aren't pierced so I swiped Vermeer's pearl for the reference photo. I will glaze as soon as the grisaille is dry.

Thanks for looking.

I think it's a great idea. Maybe I'll try the same thing for the next portrait I do of my daughter. I look forward to watching your progress.

Hi Cindy,

The drawing is very nice and I think inserting your daughter's image into a very recognizable painting adds a fresh spin on an old classic.

As far as the modeling of the head, the biggest thing I've noticed is that you have light areas in the shadows (right cheek, jaw and especially the reflected light, ect) and dark areas in the light areas (shadow below the shoulder). Another thing that a lot of people do is to continue the lightest values to the edge of the head (left side). This flattens the image and the head does not appear to be solid. Using a value that is about 2 levels below the highest value on the forehead, cheek, and chin will help to turn the edge and give the head more weight. This is based on the 9 scale value system with 9 being the lightest value (but not white) and 1 being the darkest (but not black).

You've got a great start so far because your drawing is strong--and that's the hardest part!

I hope this helps,

Renee Price

Good Start
 

Cindy,

I agree with Renee's assesment. I don't always do a grisaille under painting, but when I do, I've been following Karin Well's method, which is similar to what Renee describes.

Yes, this is definitely a "valid portrait"! Your daughter is perfectly suited to this pose, and her expression is captivating.

For some examples of borrowing from Vermeer, check out Jonathan Janson's website:

http://newvermeers.20m.com/index.htm

If you're a Vermeer lover like me, you'll also want to look at Jonathan's Essential Vermeer site:

http://essentialvermeer.20m.com/

I'm looking forward to seeing how this turns out.

Cheers

John

Just as an aside, there's a long and noble history of alluding to other artists' compositions and themes. Helen van Wyk even uses a Velasquez for her husband in one of her books.

You could do this again and again as she grows, wandering around art museums to pick this Rembrandt, that Ingres, etc etc.

Good luck.
Lisa

Thank you.
 

Thank you all for your responses.

Michelle - I've seen your work before, and your stuff is terrific. I absolutely love the little boy with curly blond hair and an ear-to-ear grin.

Renee - thanks for the compliments. I do know what you're talking about, but I don't know specifically how to put into practice what I can't see. In my reference, and with strong light from one side - I just can't make out the darker value that turns the form. I suppose this is where you're supposed to paint what you know, rather than what you see?

If I were to do what you suggest with regards to the left cheek - at what point does the 2 steps down in value grey stop and start? Is that what blends into the background to turn the form?

The reflected light on her right cheek did jump out at me, but I figured I'd fix that when I glazed it. I thought that if the lighter value wasn't apparent in the grisaille, I wouldn't see it at all in the glaze. Again, just learning this method. I attempted to attach the reference photo earlier, and it wouldn't work - I'll try again.

John - Thank you for the kind words. I actually spent most of my morning yesterday looking at the essential Vermeer site. Twas very informative and interesting. I love the modern-day twists in Janson's work!

Lisa - Thanks for the validation. I wasn't sure if what I was doing was a no-no...but, thanks for the idea for my new series! ;) Yay!

Hi Cindy,

I'm glad that my responses have helped some. I put together a quick example of what I was talking about. On the right side I added a line which separates the light from shadow. This isn't 'absolute' and I'm sure they can be separated several other ways, but this is the way that jumped out at me. Between the shadow and light are the halftones or medium tones. The halftones are the values the turn the form. I remember someone on the forum saying that the lightest values of the shadow side should be the darkest values on the light side (except for accents). That's something to keep in mind. I go by a 9 value scale with 9 the lightest and 1 the darkest. The edge on the left should be thin and soft. Hard edges around the form causes a 'cut and pasted' look. There are other members who have much more experience than I do, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Remember that the drawing is the hardest part, and you already have that!

I hope this helps,

Renee Price

Modifications
 

Hi Renee -

I've made the changes you suggested - and it does make a huge difference.

Thanks for the critiques.

Much better--the head looks more solid.

Keep up the great work!

Renee Price

Cindy

The likeness here is very good, but in the underpainting she seems to me to look slightly older than in the photo. I think this is partly because the edge of her forehead (on our left) in the underpainting drops nearly straight from where it emerges from under the scarf to where it curves out at the eyebrow. In the photo it has a more convex curve, characteristic of young children. Just a thought.

John

Yep - you're right, John - that's a big "s" curve that I missed.

I thought she looked older, too - but I didn't know why. I tend to exaggerate things like that, so to compensate, I wind up going the other way, and often lose essential but subtle elements.

Thanks!

Where I am now...
 

This is as of yesterday - seeing it online, I see it needs more warmth on the right (shadow) side of her face.

Does anything else jump out? Critiques more than welcome.

Thanks.

Personally, I would use an underpainting which is more brownish than this, although black and white can work. (For skin-tones grey areas in the underpainting work very nice, so in that respect it's alright to me ).

There are a few distortions in the face when compared with the reference photo. You made her forehead too high and the form of the piece of clothing in her hair is different; now her head looks a bit strange on the painting. On the original photo, there is a beautiful curve in her profile there. You widened her face, her jawline has changed in form also, and her ear is a bit too much to the right. You captured the individual forms of the mouth and the nose and the eyes quite well.

One of the biggest problems is that you seem to be afraid of using shadows, The painting shows her more ethereal instead of a solid volume defined by dark and lights.

Personally I would have preferred to see the green of the original photograph instead of the 'Vermeer-blue' you used now. It would have made the painting more your own. Now it looks too much like an attempt to copy the Vermeer itself.

In the white piece of clothing I see the same fear of using shadows. I like the form of that white thing in the original photograph, now it is a bit like a undefined white form. Because of the lack of shadow in the face, its original effect gets lost. It would have caused nice reflections in the shadowed part of the face.

Her hair is much darker than as you painted it. If you wanted a solid tonal structure for the composition than you should have painted the face in a lower key than the piece of white clothing, same goes for the green piece of cloth in her hair and her hair itself. The tonal values seem to be very light or very dark, while the original photograph shows a more varied tonal structure. Much of these effects can be achieved by using an underpainting in which these tonal values are already indicated. Which then can be used as a guideline for painting the final layers of paint.

The way you make the background light up makes the image a little bit kitschy. I would have preferred to keep it quite dark there.

Although I guess that was not what you were aiming for, the ethereal character of the painting has its own appealing qualities.

Very nice, though what Peter said about shadows seems very true, especially on her face. You have a good full range of values on the jacket, but almost completely flat values on the face.

Take a look at the reference and painting side by side (always helpful in any case) and notice the color/value of the shadow areas on the side of her cheek. There is a great difference between the value of that area on the reference and how you've painted it. Get the darks right and everything else will start to fall into place.

I have recently started a new system of painting that I learned from Tony Ryder, in which I paint only the darks first. Then I slowly work that area up into the light. All the other values seem much easer to get right once I have that step done correctly.

Peter - I have stewed over...er, I mean, comtemplated your critique for a while, and I first want to say: thank you for taking the time to do such a thorough job. Upon reflection, I agree with almost all of your points.

I will continue working on the piece (hopefully not overly so) and will post again.

And I'll be looking for your :thumbsup: !

Michelle - thanks to you, as well. It's a good lesson to take away - lay in the darks first.

Onward and upward!

Okay - I darkened the background, fixed the head profile, added warmth to the cheek & ear, darkened her hair, and darkened the shadow on the white shirt.

I guess it looks better but may be a bit overworked.

Michele, I checked out Tony Ryder's website, and watched all his slide-show demos. Very informative, but I noticed he sure does use small brushes...

Thanks for all the improvement tips.

What lovely lifelike color in the skintones! However, the face still doesn't have near the value range of the reference photo, or of the Vermeer.

It may have been a specific choice on your part to go with a low contrast ratio (which means having a rather subtle difference between the light and shadowed areas, as opposed to a more dramatic difference), though I think you would have a much stronger painting if you went even farther with the shadows.

As it is, the jacket, with its strong range of value, dominates the picture.

As for Tony Ryder's technique, yes he does use small brushes. One would think this would be a very slow method, but ironically I think it saves me tons of time in rework because I get it closer to being right the first time.

I think it's a lot better now. The first version;her face looked like a drawing with some colour compared to the reworked version. Michele is right about the shadows. The painting can have much better likeness and more character when you work more with the shadows. I still miss some of her most typical individual features in the painting. Don't be afraid of the shadows, they bark but don't bite! ;-)

Liked the caricatures on your website, really nice drawing style. The sensitivity for lines is visible in the way you painted her mouth and eyes.

Thank you, Michele and Peter.

I know I was still hesitant on the shadows, but with her porcelain skin I went as dark as I could make myself go. T'was a good lesson and one I will take much away from for my next portrait.

I really appreciate both of you for your guidance - thanks a million (and the same to John and Renee, as well.)

Best,

oops... I forgot...

:thumbsup:

Hi Cindy,

There might be some additional warm reflection from the collar of the jacket in the shadow of her cheek, but I'm hesitant to suggest that based on what I see on my screen. As you point out, you don't want to jeopardize the good job you've done on her cameo complexion. I think you'll have to make your own judgement, based on your direct observation of the painting. (Wasn't that helpful?)

You've certainly solved the "age" issue.

This painting is really good. Technical quibbles aside, I think your choice of juxtaposing the leather jacket with the child's translucent complexion is brilliant. I see so many "ain't she adorable" portraits of little girls that I can hardly stand to look at them anymore, but this one really captures my attention. There's enough of an edge that it makes me ponder the fact that this child is going to grow up, with all that that entails. It's not easy to paint a portrait that gets the viewer to think in this way, but that's what a lot of us strive for.

Homage to Vermeer for composition, but big points to Cindy for exploiting it very successfully. I'm sure Vermeer would approve of your effort!:thumbsup:

John

Wow. John, thank you! What an amazing compliment. I'm grinning from ear-to-ear. Thanks.

And thank you for your help on my WIP - much appreciated.

Peter - :D Thanks!

(note: I posted this reply yesterday but it's gone today - so if this is a duplicate - my apologies.)