|
Hi Denise,
I've been stuck in a little corner of limbo (or is it the other place?) all week, due to my part-time day job turning into full-time temporarily. Thanks for doing the digital crop. I've been given the same advice about the relation of the top of the head to the top of the canvas by others. I guess it's one of those dogmas that everyone adheres to in the portrait trade. I can't say that it matters to me one way or the other, although this may change with experience.
I'm intrigued by the surrealism reference. In this post the flesh tones do appear more red than in the actual painting, and consequently are similar to the shadows in the hair. In the self-portrait there was a definite reddish quality to the flesh tones, but I saw that as absolutely required by the sunset background. When I think of surrealism I think of limp watches, biomorphs in landscapes, and other distortions of forms, etc. I'm not sure what you mean, unless there is some relationship between surrealism and monochromaticity or homogeneity of color. Or is it that the color seems unnatural, hence surreal? I'm going to post a better version of Kim to try to get the jpeg closer to the real thing. It might take me a few days.
|