[Chris Saper]

Dear Mara,

Welcome to the SOG Forum, and thanks for posting your new work. I thought I would offer a few comments specifically with respect to lighting and composition.

It is a particular challenge in combining different photographic resources to make the lighting work well. In this case, the dad is lit with a flash, coming from in front of him, and low toward his eye level. The mother and baby are lit from the top; the little girl in front is lit from both front and back, and her right arm seems to be lit from the top. Some objects don't really have any real lighting direction (for example, the trash can, blanket, gazebo).

Without a consistent light source, it is, (at least for me) impossible to achieve a sense of unity in the overall piece. When I have to amalgamate resources, I am very compulsive about the quality, color and direction of light, so that if I am photographing someone to add to an existing resource, I make sure that the lighting, angle, etc. are mimicked the best I can. In my view, inconsistent lighting can become a design problem that is insurmountable, and it is disruptive to achieving a strong value pattern.

In regard to composition, I have just two comments. First, there are many tangents occurring in this painting. Tangents are problematic because they can compete with, and often actually overcome the center of interest; they also become unintended eye traps. The tangents that I see most immediately are the bridge connecting to the little girl's head; the edging between the grass and sand, that touches the girl's right arm, her father's hand, and the corner of the picnic basket; and the horizon line between the grass and distant trees, which forms tangents with the woman's belt and the gazebo.

Actually, tangents are one of my favorite problems because they are generally easily solved by moving one of the elements, losing edges, or creating a transition shape of some type to break the tangent. I try very hard to correct tangents in the drawing stage, although sometimes they can still creep up on you later! (Then you just have to fix them later.)

The second compositional area I would mention is that the shapes are scattered in a loose value pattern and they are not grouped together. The overall patterning works against establishing a center of interest and a "reading" movement across the canvas. For example, if you were to keep the pail and shovel, they would work better as connected forms. The dad, picnic basket and food are isolated forms, where they might be connected in order to simplify and therefore strenghten that part of the value pattern.

I have been told many times that paintings can much more often be improved by taking something out, rather than by adding things in. In this case, I would ask myself if certain elements are really necessary to the design...for example, the trash can, the picnic tables, the pail and shovel, etc. If I look at my painting and imagine something removed, I can ask myself whther the design is diminshed, unaffected, or improved. If it is either of the latter two, I will take the object out.

I hope this is helpful to you. My hat is off to you for your undertaking such a challenging project! I am sure your client will be delighted, give us a post-Father's Day update!

I wish you the very best,
Chris