Two siblings but which composition?
 

Hi all,

I've been commissioned to do a portrait of a brother and sister, 9 and 13 years of age. I really want this portrait to turn out good. I've been to their house and made loads of photos, but am not very experienced in taking reference photos, and could not get the kids to sit nicely together. So I've got hundreds of photos of them seperate, (in the ones they are together, at least one is pulling a face :D).

From these photos I hope to compose a good portrait. Please, please help me out. I've got six options so far. The parents/clients want an relatively informal portrait. The boy especially is a restless kid who is always busy and about.

I hope you don't mind if I post all six options....

Here's No. 1:
Rather plain and simple, but maybe good for that.

no. 2

No. 3

no. 4 (that's his hand there - might have to get rid of the hand)

no. 5

And finally no. 6
I know some of the photos are rather vague, but I have so many photos of those kids, I am sure I can at least create a likeness in their faces. Some compositions leave a few problems with clothing, as I have to make it up in some areas. I wish I had better photos, but alas. This will have to do.

I am a bit embarrassed by uploading so many images, but I would really appreciate you thoughts on these compositions. If you think they are all bad, please tell me why?

Thanks so much!!

Sophie,

If I were in your position, I would stress the heirloom nature of the kids' portraits, and that it would be a much better solution to paint a pair of separate portraits, designed to hang as a pair, but still separatable for the children to take to their own homes when they are grown.

At a glance, I am not seeing combinations where the light on both subjects is similar enough to look as if they were actually sitting together. You would need several photos with both children to know how to properly size their heads.

Lastly, the only reason I can see to paint "together" instead of "separate" is to convey an interaction or relationship, and none of these combinations show the kids relating to one another. And perhaps they don't relate to each other...in which case you can tell the parent that they are so uniquely individual in their personalities that each should have the chance to shine.

Thank you so much, Chris, for your quick and knowledgeable response! I agree, that two seperate portraits would probably be better. I will definitely think about suggesting that to the clients. But we've already, sort-of, agreed on the double portrait, so will try to work with what I've got as well. You are right that the children don't interact much, they did not seem to do so when I met them either.

As to the lighting....I know I have to keep an eye on the direction of the light. The photos that I've combined were all taken on the same sofa, next to the same window, at practically the same time. When I paint I can make sure the light warmth or colour is the same and make sure the direction is not off. But I see your point.

I've got plenty of photos of the children together, so I can roughly check the right head sizes.

Thanks again, for your reply. I really appreciate you input! You've given me plenty to think about.

Of the ones you posted I like #3 the best, but as Chris mentioned, there's a problem in all of them about the light direction. The boy's face has light coming from two directions and the girl's face has just one, for example.

I also wouldn't choose a composition where one of the heads was much larger than the other, even if it's because one kid was closer to the camera. It sends a message about importance that you and the parents may not want. The key to solving that problem is during the photo shoot -- the camera should not be too close to the subjects and then any difference in sizes due to distance will be minimized.

Also, how do you plan to handle the girl's braces? Paint them as they are? I've painted a couple of kids with braces and we go for a closed-mouth smile on those portraits.

Thanks so much, Michele for taking a look as well. I've agreed with the clients to not paint her braces. Hope I'll succeed there. I see your point on the importance of the sitters when one is painted larger than the other.

I know about the lighting issue. I'd have to add that slightly to the girl then as well.

I've come up with three more compositions, of which I quite like no. 7 (the clients left it up to me to put the dog in or not) and 8 (but what to do about that big empty wall space?)
Here they are:
http://www.sophieploeg.com/ALL.jpg(numbering is different there)

Thanks again. I find this really difficult, but am determined to bring this one to a succesful end. I really appreciate your comments.

I really think you need to shoot some more photos. Your job of actually doing the painting will be MUCH easier with the right reference.

If you don't put the braces in you have to invent teeth with the correct lighting and form. If you invent light on the side of the girl's face you run a great risk of never capturing the likeness. These things are almost impossible for even the most experienced artists to do. I wouldn't attempt them at all myself.

I also would not include the dog. He dominates the composition too much. Also, most portrait artists charge extra for a pet in a portrait. It will be a considerable amount of work to integrate him into the composition and to get the drawing and painting of a third "face" right.

You could try following these steps when setting up a basic photo shoot:

1. Position yourself off to the side of a window, right next to the wall, with a tripod. Don't change your position at all. If you start out the photo shoot standing up, don't squat down or sit. You want all the photos to have exactly the same light so you can mix and match. If you move, the light in relation to the camera moves and you can't combine the images.

2. Position the kids in a simple pose, a couple of feet from the window, facing the light. Have her sit in a nice chair and him standing behind her with his hand on her shoulder or the back of the chair for example. Angle their shoulders toward one another a little.

3. Bribe them, if necessary, to sit still. Check with the mom ahead of time and see if she can take them out for ice cream afterwards if they behave. Emphasize to her that you need their co-operation if there is to be a good portrait.

4. Shoot as many photos as you can. I would plan on shooting about 200 shots, with the same pose and lighting, of two wiggly kids.

5. You can vary subtle things throughout the shoot. Try changing the direction their faces are pointing in, looking at you, looking at the window, etc. Try different hand positions, or some smiling/not smiling poses.

6. Work out with the mom (before the shoot) what to do about the braces. I would go for a closed mouth smile, myself.

Having the right reference will make ALL the difference in the world to the success of this portrait. It will be worth the effort to reshoot.

Here's an overhead lighting diagram you might want to try. This set up will give you nice soft lighting from slightly off to the side of the figures. Be sure not to get too close to them with your camera. Zoom in with the lens, rather than positioning yourself close to them. This will minimize distortion of the features.

Michele,

This is a great example and advice. It helps all of us who are just "getting our feet wet". Good luck, Sophie. I will be interested in seeing how this commission progresses. I hope you share it all with us here...

Shapes
 

Think about light and dark masses or shapes. I'd certainly shoot them togther and not try to fix the arrangement in paint-shop. Be careful of your lens choice. There's much written about this herein. Lastly watch out for a "tennis-match" composition where the focal point is unclear and the viewer bounces from one face to the other-one to the other...better to unify them.

When there are two subjects I sometimes try and have one looking at the camera and one looking off a bit. That way the eyes of the one looking at the viewer become the focal point, to avoid, as Tim described, the "tennis match" problem.

Thanks for all that wonderful advice!! I'll certainly keep it all in mind with a next portrait.

Hi Sophie,

If it makes you feel any better, I believe that the two-person compostion, where both parties are pretty much the same size, can be quite tricky to pull off. Have you tried to talk your client into a diptych? The frame is built to encompass both individual paintings, yet they can be separated later.

This is the same problem with married couple portraits. I like compositions where the subjects heads are on different levels, but you have to be careful about subtle (or obvious) "who's in charge here" implications.

By the way, I always like sibling portraits where the children are sharing a book together.

Keep us posted as to how this turns out.

I totally agree with Michele and Chris, very well put. One of my credos is if you are painting a single person in a painting, you are painting an individual (John) (Sally), if you are painting more than one person in a painting, you are painting the relationship (brother and sister). A double portrait does not work if there is no relationships, and there is no relationship between the children in your photographs....

The way I persuade a client to go with two separate paintings, is tell them that in the future, the kids will be fighting over who gets the painting. Think of the family discord! This way, they will both get their own painting. Harmony ensues....

Peggy

Thanks, Peggy and Linda.

I'll keep it all in mind for next time! The clients have by now chosen from a quartet of options I gave them, and I am working hard on the painting.

They chose this one:
http://www.sophieploeg.com/Setup%2011SMALL.jpg
The only real thing I need to tackle here is the annoying edge of the sofa!

Thanks for all the advice.