|
Thanks, Julie, Richard, Mary, and Virgil for you comments, suggestions, and taking the time with this. It is not easy admitting first to yourself that a work is not what you initially felt it was, and then that you are not sure what went wrong. But my desire is to learn from this piece.
When I first picked up my pastels about 5 years ago I knew nothing of color temperature or edges or neutralizing colors. Even so, my eyes always seemed to see the portrait I intended instead of the attempt that revealed weaknesses. Hopefully, between what I have learned in classes, workshops, and working problems out at the easel, I will find future portrait work to be both more rewarding, and with a stronger foundation, better executed.
Virgil, it did not occur to me in the moment when I chose to attempt this that it would be beyond my abilities. But your words rang true when I read them, that much more mastery of all aspects of figure and portraiture are necessary to meet such a challenging aspiration. Thanks for your analysis of the complexities of the posthumous portrait.
Mary, I agree that poor photos result in weak images when you are going for a likeness. That, and having never met the subject, does make it hard to even know the subtleties that are required.
Richard, yes, that certain something is needed in such a work. It is hard to admit that even though I believed I could capture that, I was not in a good position to be able to do so.
Julie, thank you for all the time and thought you put into your responses to me. I began by perusing the portraits here and on several of my favorites sites, as well as those of Sargent and a few others, to see what struck me as excellent, and why. That was a great suggestion of a good exercise. And I agree, without a likeness that those who knew the subject could immediately respond to, it almost didn't matter if the rest of the painting was any good or not; it didn't fulfill my goal. All of your suggestions have been noted and I want you to know I appreciate all of your help.
|