Composition for 3 in a portrait
 

I have been commissioned to paint 3 siblings in one portrait and need some pointers, especially with composition. The client has limited wall space so it will not be a full length portrait but probably waist up. Do you put the shortest one in the middle to avoid the triangle effect or will your eye travel easily from one to the other if the tallest is in the middle? Are there definite "don'ts" with this type of portrait?

Would enjoy reading from other artists how they have approached this. This is my first attempt with oils for 3 in 1 painting and I am a little nervous about doing a good job. Any advice is greatly appreciated :) Thanks!

Paintings of three
 

Well I am not sure how to start but I have one question. Why do you want to avoid the triangle?? That is not a bad thing it is actually considered good composition. (used by Rembrandt)

My advice is do what I do when I am having a problem with a piece. Look at the work of others to see how they handled a similar problem.
(by others I mean those considered to be great masters).

I have attached a Painting by Sargent. It is full figure but that should not be a problem look at how the heads are arranged (in a triangle). Try to adapt your composition to keep the heads all on a different plane (not in a line). And try to give a impression of interaction between the figures that will help hold the image together as one (not appear as if it is a montage) and make it more interesting

Good luck.

I've seen thousands of portraits because of the work I do and I find I'm bothered by multiples in a portrait where all subjects are waist up and none have hands showing. I think if there is a chair involved, the 3 children can be positioned in such a way that you're getting a combination of waist (primarily) and 3/4, which I personally find more pleasing.

Take a look at Peggy Baumgaertner's portrait: http://www.portraitartist.com/baumga.../charltons.htm

You might get some ideas at Hongmin Zou's site. He has a section on groups: http://www.hongminzou.com

This one by Bart Lindstrom is only two children, but might give you some positioning ideas: http://www.portraitartist.com/lindst...narosejohn.htm

Though these portraits might be larger than what you're planning, the positioning might still give you some ideas.

Great advice! I was not trying to avoid the triangle, just seeking advice about it. I guess I was envisioning the three in a straight line since it was going to be a waist up portrait. I will, of course, take many photos and hope for the best. Thanks for posting the Sargent painting.

I would really like to go a little bigger in canvas size with this portrait so we'll see...I take the photos this weekend. I agree with you Cynthia on the hands showing. Thanks for the examples and advice!

Dear Virginia

Micheal's advice is very good: Look for portraits that treat groups in a fashion similar to how yours is likely to be arranged. Artists have been doing that--looking at how others have handled various situations--since there were artists. After all, why re-invent the wheel?

As far as hands go, that's normally a matter of budget and expectations from the client, isn't it? I agree that it can add artistical interest, but it isn't always do-able.

I realise I'm not adding anything especially new to the comments already given. Just a word of confirmation, I suppose.

Best of luck with the project.

Juan

Dear Virginia,

I was in a similar situation a few years ago with three feisty young siblings. Near the end of the fifth [!!] roll of film I suggested they "make a pyramid" with the youngest girl on top. I was very happy with the resulting composition and the painting showed their close, fun-loving relationship.

By the way, three subjects in a painting does not translate into a painting that is three times more difficult to execute... it generally works out to be thirty times more difficult to execute. At least for me!

The bigger they are, the harder they fall...

I'm always delighted to see another Arizonan "on board" SOG! Please call me when you see the results of your photo shoot. I'd love to see your work.

Best regards, Linda

Linda,

Thanks for your reply! I really like your work, especially your brush work and use of color. I see that you are from Phoenix! There are quite a few of us in the Valley. As Debra suggested, we should start a portrait group.

I did take the photos this past Sunday and I was amazed at how well they turned out. I used my digital camera and took 88 shots. I wanted to use my 35 mm camera too but thought I might be pushing my luck with the children and their cooperation. The best shot was outside with the three sitting down on the grass with the sun against their backs.

The mother of the children wanted the painting to measure approx. 32" x 44". However, the grandmother of the children (person paying for the portrait), told her daughter to make it smaller because years later when one of the children inherit the portrait, they will not want it that big. Lack of wall space or something like that. I thought that was an interesting take on things. Whatever they want is fine by me.

If your interested, I'll keep you posted on my progress. It will be slow going as life is getting in the way right now.

Hi Virginia,

I am so glad that you are busily engaged in this three-person work! One of the most difficult things I have found, as the number of subjects increases, is to find a composition that pleases the client, and still pleases the painter. By that I mean that for a portrait to also be an interesting painting, it is difficult to have every subject have equal importance/facial access, and/or eye contact. I have found that many clients are unwilling to give one person "short shrift"...although I must say the Sargent painting is a clear exception!

By the way, I completely agree with Linda, multiple person paintings, although convention gives multiple subject discounts, in fact should probably have pricing premiums.

Good luck, I hope to see you soon,
Chris

Return to older post on multi-subject paintings
 

Well, I have returned to this subject to add one more thing, apart from the fact that three people in a portrait means getting the likeness of three people. It is actually easier with three than two to get a nice composition. It is always easier to work with odd numbers than even numbers of subjects when trying to get a dynamic composition. So what I do is always start with a thumbnail sketch (or 2 or 3 or more sketches). First, I decide on the number of people - say it's two. Now with two heads, I know I will have two areas of interest. That is hard to balance without getting boring, so I must add a third area of interest to have that odd number I want. So I start with shapes. I arrange my shapes so I have three areas: #1, the area of most importance; #2, the second area of importance; and #3, the third area of importance.

Now in this example, #1 and #2 are the two heads, and they are both close to equal, but one is in a dominant position. The other is in more dramatic lighting, with the shadow side facing the viewer. They balance well, but alone would not work well. The third area, the hands of the lower person, acts as the #3 area of importance, and together they form a triangle.

Now this need not be the hands; it could be a vase of flowers, or a pet on the lap of one of the two, or even just a book or an object of affection or interest to one of the sitters. Also, the hand of the figure in the back is resting on the shoulder of the front person, adding a line for the eye to follow. This is a very fast sketch and a lot of the details would still need to be worked out. But the thing I want to stress is that the composition is not an afterthought based on what I have for reference, but rather the beginning. I then get the reference needed to carry out the composition to a more detailed sketch. From there, to a final sketch, including values. Then start to paint. By the time I pick up a brush or mix color, I know exactly what the painting will be, starting from a composition of simple shapes. Then all you have to worry about is getting the likeness correct for each person, and not about composition.

As you can see by the sketch I included, the beginning thumbnail need not be detailed at all; but before you start to paint, you need to work out the details beyond that thumbnail. Even at the early stage, you are thinking of lighting - where your darks will be in relation to your lights, and how they form lines, direction. You may find in a sketch that the arm or hand is pointing out the side, taking the viewer out away from interest. Better to see that now and change it, than to see it when you are trying to get the likeness of the sitter. Also, having to move a hand and fake it later because you did not get a reference with the hand where you wanted, or in the position you wanted, will frustrate you to no end. It can even make the difference between a success and a failure.

It is all about design. Although I am not a fan of abstract art in and of itself, I do feel that a knowledge of abstract design is of great importance to the realist painter when designing dynamic compositions. If you treat the objects in your painting not as objects, but as abstract shapes of line and value, it can help in designing your compositions. Then arrange your objects (position the people in this case) within that composition.

Composition first, subjects second. And I have not even mentioned color balance that is just one more step. Hey, no one said this art stuff was easy. :)

Oops
 

I see the problem - I saved the image in CMYK by mistake.