Family in Park

[John Bruso]

Hi All,

This is Mara. Attached is my latest portrait. I finished it this week for a client. I'm so excited to post my work for you to critique. I really value your opinions and feedback. It's one of the most important things I need to get better. So, don't hold anything back... please be honest and let me have it.

This portrait was commissioned by a woman who wanted to give her husband a father's day gift. The trickiest part about this whole project was that I had to come up with a concept and a layout using only the few photos she had laying around the house. We couldn't do a photo session with him because it would ruin the surpise. So, we came up with the idea and took a bunch of photos of her and the kids at a park. In his pose, he's actually in his living room playing with his baby daughter on the floor. Thank God for Photoshop.

36" X 48"
Oil on Canvas

Thanks!!!

Mara

[John Bruso]

more detail

[John Bruso]

more

[John Bruso]

his detail

[Tom Martinez]

I believe that you have a similar problem that I am working on...an edge problem. Your figures appear to be pasted onto the background and foreground. The edges of the outlines of the figures need to be softened somewhat to give them the three dimensional appearance. Some edges will be hard, some soft and some none existent. Otherwise, a very nice painting, I'm sure that they will be very pleased with it.

[Rochelle Brown]

What a charming and uplifting family portrait! The colors are so vivid.

It occurred to me that the Mother and baby would look better on the left of the painting so that the eyes could first see her and she would serve as an introduction to the whole family scene. It would be easier on the eyes and more orderly.

[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

[John Bruso]

Chris,

Thanks for taking time to write such a great critique of my family in the park painting. I agree with every comment you made and I will be more aware of those things as I jump into my next project. You especially nailed the problems I have with lighting and tangents. It is sad that the same problems keep creeping up in my work over and over. Why don't I learn? Of all my professional work so far, that particular painting is my least favorite (and most recent). I think I was in a hurry and also working with a client who really tried to take control of the project and the process. Do you have any advice for me on how to deal with such tough clients?

I just visited your site. Your work is very beautiful. I love the soft edges and colors. I also like how you have simplified the portraits and made the painting all about the face. Often I want to take on the same sort of style, but everyone that hires me wants these elaborate, detailed pieces that are more like an illustration. On one hand, it is wonderful that people recognize my style as unique, but it makes me hesitate to try something new given the small amounts of time I actually have to paint.

Thank you, again Chris. Your comments are very valuable to me. I will post my next painting in a month or so and you can take a look at how I used your advice, and whether or not I learned from my mistakes.

Mara

[Chris Saper]

Hi Mara,

It is sometimes very difficult to know what to do! The only advice I can offer to you surrounds an article I read sometime back (I cannot recall the site) about spotting the problem client up front, ie red flags that you should heed...like: don't let a client force you to accept a poor resource photo; don't take commissions from clients who are drunk or otherwise incapacitated (do not laugh at this, it really happens); don't accept work that entails an unreasonable deadline; and beware of the clinet who tells you, "I have NEVER liked any photograph I've had taken". The few disasters I have had could have been avoided if I had taken this advice to heart!

Also, it is so important to review your portfolio! As Peggy Baumgaertner has said, you will be judged by the WEAKEST work in your portfolio, so get rid of it. Don't show anything you don't want to do more of. I have a friend who said "Maybe I should paint some little girls in white dresses and guys in suits!" My reply was "Only if this is the kind of work you want." If you don't want to be painting landscape type illustrative settings, dont' show them. If you do, then do.

I wish you the very best, Chris

[Cynthia Daniel]

Mara,

You may need to do some simpler portraits that are not commissions but just for your portfolio. In my portrait marketing experience, generally, people won't buy what they can't see.