Tim and his teddybear
 

This is one of my best friend's first child, Tim. This is a cropped version, due to the no nudes rule. I

And the reference:

Increasing intensity of shadows
 

Hanna, it is absolutely darling!

The only thing that I can comment on would be darkening the back of the head some more (area towards our left). You might want to slightly increase the intensity of the shadow area of the neck. I am basing my observations strictly on the comparison with the photo. Photos can be deceiving so wait for others to comment, who have more experience with pastels than me.

Hanna,

I too am blind to its errors. I see that you have omitted the fabric(?) folds around the baby's head. I am curious as to whether you omitted them throughout and if so how you grounded the baby. Beautiful photo, beautiful portrait.

Hanna,

It is beautiful. You have every right to be proud of it, it is very difficult to portray children and especially babies.

I wouldn't object to your posting the full image. Do babies qualify as nudes? What do others think?

Hanna,

Just a note on the way by, regarding a couple of shadow areas.

I think that indeed the photographic representation is affecting the shadow cast by the head onto the baby's right shoulder. First, I'd considerably soften the edge (on our left) of that shadow shape. It's the photo, and possibly the strength of the studio light, that's making for such a hard edge (which also doesn't look "baby-like", to put it in nontechnical terms). Second, reconsider the manner in which that cast shadow behaves as it goes up and over the shoulder. Rather than turn toward the arm and follow the shoulder around and down the arm, I think it actually goes straight up over the mid-shoulder. Bring up Third, which is that the cast shadow will become increasingly less intense as it moves away from the form (here the head) casting the shadow. On top of the shoulder, there should be a lot more light in that shadow shape than over closer to the neck.

I also think the reflected light on the neck is slightly strong, creating a "striped" effect. If you squint at the photo, that light disappears. Not so in the pastel.

Lastly for now, the halftone running from the near corner of the baby's mouth down around the chin is too uniformly dark and wide. About midway it actually almost disappears, as it would, because the planes of the form are moving from out of the direct light, then into it, then out of it again.

As for questions about posting the full figure, I recommend sending it to Cynthia first for review. It's a very difficult line to have to draw, obviously easier if it doesn't have to be drawn at all, even though I have little doubt that there would be any problem in this particular instance.

The rendering of the pastel is very accomplished and beautiful.

In general...

I am not critiquing those critiquing, so please know that I tread very lightly with this comment, but you will find that the final arbitrator is not necessarily the photograph.

This is particularly true in reference to shadow values and edges. A photograph will intensify value differences and might show a hard line where there is none. This is why working from life is so important. Not that one should never use photographs, but that the artist be able to interpret that photograph. The artist be able to understand what life looks like.

I would say that Hanna has interpreted the photograph correctly. She has modulated the shadow on the baby's skin into an airy, soft, bluish baby shadow, not the hard plastic orange shadow on the photograph.

I see only two very minor corrections, the neck under the chin is just a hair too light, it should move back to into a mid value, and Steven's comment about the cast shadow on the trunk being to "edgy." I would think about softening in.

Beautiful, sensitive work.

Peggy

Thank you so much everybody for taking your time helping me.

It is sadly true what Peggy got into a little. I

Separate shadow from light!
 

Hanna,

I think you are a very talented artist with great potential, therefore I am giving you the following advice for your consideration.

Living in the New York City area I have been able to study the paintings of the great master painters, and to my eye, the essential quality they share is the masterful way in which they handle the modeling of form.

The key to successful modeling is the separation of light and shadow. Regardless of what you think you see, the values in the shadow areas must be lower than the values in the areas illuminated by the light source. If you violate this principle, you'll sacrifice unity and flatten the image. Reflected light should be handled primarily through hue changes, and most certainly not by value alone.

In your painting, for example, you have merged the reflected light under the jowl with the light on the cheek. In the photo, the distinction between the two is subtle and in this case must be exaggerated.

Modeling of form has nothing to do with copying what is in front of you, be it photo or life. The creation of form is a concept that is manifested by the artist in the painting or drawing. I had this realization at a show of Van Dyke paintings. I noticed that the figures in the paintings appeared more real than the people looking at the paintings.

The brain is the artist's most valuable tool.

Thank you Marvin for your post. I