Hi Beth,
The first thing that bothers me about this piece is the baby's forehead. Babies have large heads, and usually "half" of it is above their eyes. It's that large head and low eyes, that makes anything appear "cute" to us. I checked the photo and sure enough, I believe you have underestimated the baby's forehead. The part of the face below the eyes needs to be smaller, in proportion, than the part that is above the eyes. It might be only a very "small" amount, but it will make a difference.
The next thing I notice are the rough strokes. A baby's face is somewhat unique in that the planes are so slight and sensitive. It's pretty difficult to depict those planes with strokes that only go one way, without smudging. It would be so much easier if you were doing a landscape.
I suggest that you find some pastels of babies that have been done by Mary Cassatt, and study them for stroke direction and placement. If this were my drawing I would not hesitate to smudge. If it gets too smooth, you can always put the rough lines back in.
In my humble opinion, babies' faces need to be smudged, at least a little.
For instance here is a link(I hope it will work) that shows three of Cassatts pastel drawings. Although there are many rough loose strokes used, the faces show a seriously large amount of very complicated smudging.Look at the two pastels on the left and one down on the right, on the second link.
http://www.clarkart.edu/museum_progr...rker=9&start=9
http://www.tfaoi.com/newsmu/nmus40d.htm
Threaded Mode
