Camryn

Julianne Lowman · 01-09-2004, 03:25 PM

This 19 x 19 pastel on sky blue Mi-Teintes paper has value issues, so any assistance would be greatly appreciated. The child's skin is almost transparent which, for me, is difficult to portray. Also, the lighting is slightly yellow in appearance. The portrait in person has the same color scheme as the reference.

Julianne Lowman · 01-09-2004, 03:27 PM

Photo reference...

Leslie Ficcaglia · 01-10-2004, 06:14 PM

Julianne, that's lovely. You've caught her face perfectly as far as the likeness goes, and what a beautiful child, too.

With your values, I always look to see where my darkest darks lie, and then compare those with other darks in the picture. In this one the shadows in her hair, on either side of her face, are darkest, but the corners of her mouth and the eyelashes of her right eye (our left) are almost as dark, and yet they don't give that impression in your painting. The hair just above her forehead on her right (our left) is also darker in the reference photo, and in general the hair tends to be a bit darker than you've got it. As far as lights, her forehead, cheeks, bridge of the nose and hollow in her throat are much brighter, relatively speaking, in the photo than in the painting. Lightening them up would also bring a bit more life to the work. In other words I'd punch up some of the contrast overall and see where that gets you.

Aside from that, on my monitor the reference photo skin tones are pink and blue; in the painting they have more of a yellow and green tone. That makes the painting more monochromatic than perhaps it should be, since there's little difference between the colors in her hair and in her flesh. Take a look and see what you think. But these are just details, and what's impressive is that the face and features are exactly the same in both photo and painting. Kudos!

Chris Saper · 01-14-2004, 07:48 PM

Dear Julianne,

Working with a studio flash photo, unfortunately, leaves the artist without the light and shadow patterns that are needed to create a sense of dimension, and without much color information. For your next portrait you would really benefit by reading the Forum sections on lighting the subject, as well as the resource photo critiques, so that you can get resource material that is more helpful.

That being said, I think that the dominant warm colors in your portrait need temperature relief. Even on my monitor I can see cool skin tones above the eyebrows, under the eyes, around the muzzle of the mouth, the part of the hair along the hairline, and on the neck. The red shirt is much cooler than you have portrayed it, and it is throwing some relatively cool reflected reds into the underside of the cheek and chin on our right.

I wonder if the blue paper might have caused you to overcompensate with the warm tones. Did you complete the background at the same time as the face?

I don't know if this beautiful child is your beautiful child, but if you can, take the opportunity to re-photograph her in directional light that will give you the visual information you need to produce a thrilling portrait.

Julianne Lowman · 01-15-2004, 06:35 PM

I really appreciate the help!

Chris, the resource photo was taken with natural light (window) with a fill light on the side. I didn't realize when looking at it that it would give the impression of a studio flash. I'm still trying to figure out the best posing and lighting methods within the confines of my small studio.

I have reposted a more accurate (as far as my monitor will reveal) finished portrait, color wise.

Leslie, I agree with your comments regarding values. I tend to have difficulty getting the darks really dark without going to the generic black. However, after this painting was completed and delivered, I acquired many more "darks" from the Unison brand that I believe will work in the future.